Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Daniel

Real Name Daniel   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname CJ_Parker
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Feb 11, 2006, 23:49
Total Comments 3554 (Veteran)
User ID 24408
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 ] Older >


News Comments > Star Citizen Procedurally Generated Planets
41. Re: Star Citizen Procedurally Generated Planets Dec 17, 2015, 16:13 CJ_Parker
 
Razumen wrote on Dec 17, 2015, 14:21:
CJ_Parker wrote on Dec 17, 2015, 13:37:
Wolfox wrote on Dec 17, 2015, 13:24:
Maniac wrote on Dec 17, 2015, 12:10:
Wolfox wrote on Dec 17, 2015, 11:18:
Oh look, Star Citizen now has a feature that's been implemented years ago in Evochron, a game with a total budget probably around 0.1% of the Star Citizen budget?

Yeah, that's mighty impressive.

I first saw seamless planetary landings in Elite 2, their budget was even smaller. Your point is?

My point is that what they showed is not impressive at all to me, mostly because people with a much smaller budget have already done it (arguably) better. One could argue that Star Citizen's procedural generation *looks* better, but in this particular case I can't even go there - at least not yet.

It doesn't look better at all. Note how blurry and shitty and low-res everything starts to look the further they zoom out and there is a reason why it goes black which is to hide the extreme shittiness of it all.
And yeah you can find dozens of similar videos on YouTube like this one for example. It's not really impressive at all until they have an actual game and people can actually fly into and out of space ports like that. You know, more than one guy.
Wake me up when they've made this work within the context of the greater game and where this actually works out being fun for people and trolls don't camp the landing platforms, ram people on approach and all the obstacles that come with MMO gaming.

We're years away from seeing any of this in the game. The only reason they haphazardly slapped this together was definitely just to piss all over the E:D Horizons parade. The timing is too obvious and it's now also obvious that Christ Roberts lied yet again when he said they have a lot of respect for Frontier and Elite Dangerous.

This has been a milestone for awhile now, it has nothing to do with Elite. Everything you've said is just painting your own words over factual information.

They already DO have a game out with more than one person, with spaceports, etc. Granted, it's buggy, but it's still in alpha obviously.

Of course, critics (like you) will always keep moving their goalposts back in a ever increasingly desperate attempt to keep their inane nitpicking relevant.

Wrong, dude. I want this shit to succeed cuz I'm in it at physical CE level plus a starter ship Mustang package. Lotsa dough. Day 1 account, golden ticket, the whole nine yards.

However, I will keep giving CIG shit as long as they just show flashy trailers with zero substance to the easy-to-impress mouthbreathers with big wallets instead of actually delivering a playable game.

We are literally lightyears away from the game they pitched and that's been expanded like mad via the stretch goals. Yet their retarded lying shitbag CEO says it will be done by the end of 2016.

You know, you can delay a game all you like. Fine with me. But I'm not that willing to accept outright lies. If you are easily impressed and enjoy being lied to, well, more power to you. Enjoy your flashy trailers of shit that might never make it to the game (in that form) and make sure to open that wallet some more. Chris will love you for it and include you in his prayers every night before banging Sandi. Promise.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Procedurally Generated Planets
31. Re: Star Citizen Procedurally Generated Planets Dec 17, 2015, 13:37 CJ_Parker
 
Wolfox wrote on Dec 17, 2015, 13:24:
Maniac wrote on Dec 17, 2015, 12:10:
Wolfox wrote on Dec 17, 2015, 11:18:
Oh look, Star Citizen now has a feature that's been implemented years ago in Evochron, a game with a total budget probably around 0.1% of the Star Citizen budget?

Yeah, that's mighty impressive.

I first saw seamless planetary landings in Elite 2, their budget was even smaller. Your point is?

My point is that what they showed is not impressive at all to me, mostly because people with a much smaller budget have already done it (arguably) better. One could argue that Star Citizen's procedural generation *looks* better, but in this particular case I can't even go there - at least not yet.

It doesn't look better at all. Note how blurry and shitty and low-res everything starts to look the further they zoom out and there is a reason why it goes black which is to hide the extreme shittiness of it all.
And yeah you can find dozens of similar videos on YouTube like this one for example. It's not really impressive at all until they have an actual game and people can actually fly into and out of space ports like that. You know, more than one guy.
Wake me up when they've made this work within the context of the greater game and where this actually works out being fun for people and trolls don't camp the landing platforms, ram people on approach and all the obstacles that come with MMO gaming.

We're years away from seeing any of this in the game. The only reason they haphazardly slapped this together was definitely just to piss all over the E:D Horizons parade. The timing is too obvious and it's now also obvious that Christ Roberts lied yet again when he said they have a lot of respect for Frontier and Elite Dangerous.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Procedurally Generated Planets
28. Re: Star Citizen Procedurally Generated Planets Dec 17, 2015, 13:21 CJ_Parker
 
Very classy of CIG to shit all over the E:D Horizons release with this half-baked "me too" crap that won't be in the game before 2020 anyway.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Elite Dangerous: Horizons Early Access
36. Re: Elite Dangerous: Horizons Early Access Dec 16, 2015, 10:32 CJ_Parker
 
$60 is a fair new game price for Horizons for newcomers since it naturally includes the whole base game and galaxy but Frontier should definitely work on a system where they check whether you own the game and then offer an expansion price ($30 max) for people who do own it. Same for all future expansions, too. And then they need to make the whole check work on their own store as well as Steam, of course.

This comment was edited on Dec 16, 2015, 10:38.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > GeForce Experience Beta Adds Features
4. Re: GeForce Experience Beta Adds Features Dec 16, 2015, 10:20 CJ_Parker
 
Ozmodan wrote on Dec 16, 2015, 08:59:
This software is so broken. Won't even download graphics drivers on windows 10. I just ignore it now.

GFE has been working flawless for me for years now. Win 7 here though... so my guess is it's more like Windows 10 is fucking with GFE and not the other way around. Fuck Microsoft buggy ass dreck coding!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Elite Dangerous: Horizons Early Access
23. Re: Elite Dangerous: Horizons Early Access Dec 16, 2015, 06:03 CJ_Parker
 
Arithon wrote on Dec 16, 2015, 04:12:
Offline mode: Offline was NEVER a promised feature. The game was ALWAYS sold as an online multiplayer game. Anyone who says different is lying or is misled. Read the Kickstarter proposal.

Well, you are lying or being misled, dude. I love Elite: Dangerous and David Braben is a great guy for sure but they really FUCKED UP big time with regard to the offline play promise. They should have told people much earlier that it would not be in the game.

Anyway, here it is from the original KS page...



How will single player work? Will I need to connect to a server to play?


The galaxy for Elite: Dangerous is a shared universe maintained by a central server. All of the meta data for the galaxy is shared between players. This includes the galaxy itself as well as transient information like economies. The aim here is that a player's actions will influence the development of the galaxy, without necessarily having to play multiplayer.

The other important aspect for us is that we can seed the galaxy with events, often these events will be triggered by player actions. With a living breathing galaxy players can discover new and interesting things long after they have started playing.

Update! The above is the intended single player experience. However it will be possible to have a single player game without connecting to the galaxy server. You won't get the features of the evolving galaxy (although we will investigate minimising those differences) and you probably won't be able to sync between server and non-server (again we'll investigate).





^ so in the 'Update!' part they absolutely promised offline play just w/o the benefits (or disadvantages... depending on one's point of view) of the more dynamic evolving online galaxy.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Elite Dangerous: Horizons Early Access
22. Re: Elite Dangerous: Horizons Early Access Dec 16, 2015, 05:56 CJ_Parker
 
loomy wrote on Dec 16, 2015, 02:30:
Vall Forran wrote on Dec 15, 2015, 23:22:
They are basically on the guild wars system. Free to play, no subscription, buy expansions. Or don't buy them and still play.

But, go ahead, buy your Star Citizen ships with real money every few days...that's way cheaper than a $50 game.

star citizen has announced nothing like this. as of now, buying the star citizen game for $50 or whatever gets you ALL of it.

Ummm no. Star Citizen has exactly announced the very same system. No sub fees but you will have to pay for content expansions (some expansions might be free but the substantial ones will be buy to play).
Early SC backers will have some benefits in that regard just like early backers of E:D who pledged north of 80 (or 90?). The early E:D backers above that target sum got a lifetime expansion pass and will save a lot of money (probably more than any early SC backer will ever save by the way).
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Interviews
18. Re: Morning Interviews Dec 16, 2015, 05:48 CJ_Parker
 
BioShock is definitely overrated by some. I thought it was a good game. Not great but really good.

It could have achieved greatness if it would have had less gimmicky gameplay. The levels felt like a themepark specifically set up to put the game's "toys" to use. This unfortunately tainted the otherwise great atmosphere because the levels lacked credibility. It did not feel like a natural underwater city at all.

It also could have done with less backtracking. They artificially stretched the play time this way.

Also, the good vs. evil concept with the big daddies and little sisters was disappointingly shallow. So much wasted potential for player choice having actual consequences...

The game would have been outright mediocre if not for some great characters (especially that crazy artist), decent writing, voice acting and great visuals.
I don't necessarily prefer style over substance but style was this game's saving grace.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
1. Re: Morning Metaverse Dec 15, 2015, 09:35 CJ_Parker
 
Spoilers? What spoilers?

YOU MEAN STUFF LIKE HOW LUKE IS GONNA DIE IN TFA???
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Battlefield Hardline Getaway Next Month
7. Re: Battlefield Hardline Getaway Next Month Dec 15, 2015, 04:47 CJ_Parker
 
DangerDog wrote on Dec 14, 2015, 21:17:
Must be depressing working on DLC for a game nobody will play.

http://bfhstats.com/

Haha so you think they worked on this AFTER the game was released?

Wait. Let me laugh even harder.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAAAAAAAA

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
1. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 14, 2015, 12:05 CJ_Parker
 
BWAHAHAHAHAHAAA bitch got zapped! Right on! What a fucking bitch, too. When they called her back she denied knowing of any accident. What an asshole. Serves her right... ruthless fuckers like her should be jailed for a long time.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Nears $100M
48. Re: Star Citizen Nears $100M Dec 13, 2015, 13:28 CJ_Parker
 
Nah. That can not be true. The infallible uber God of game development, the Chairman Himself, His Holiness Christ Roberts, has said that it will be out by the end of next year. You dare question Him heathen???  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > DICE Starting "The Next Battlefield"
7. Re: DICE Starting Dec 13, 2015, 13:24 CJ_Parker
 
They can shove their next premium pass infested rip-off garbage scamfest where the sun don't shine.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Nears $100M
40. Re: Star Citizen Nears $100M Dec 13, 2015, 09:26 CJ_Parker
 
Well, as I said the surround setup was the FIRST thing that had to go, i.e. less than two minutes after I launched the game. All of the issues I encountered and described were on a single screen 1440p with GTX 770 4GB cards in SLI.

And I get it's alpha. I do not expect a Blizzard level of polish here. What I do expect, however, is to not see the same performance, stability and graphical issues that I've seen for more than TWO YEARS now when they released the hangar module in 2013.

Call me old fashioned but my opinion is that shit should actually, you know, improve over the course of two years.
This release is the opposite in many regards. I've been able to play the space tutorial "fine" (well, lots of bugs but it ran at least) and now it's unplayable again.

This reaffirms my notion that they spit&glue every release and that they are having massive issues on the underlying architectural level. Issues they should not have if their CEO would put more emphasis on constructing a working game instead of spitting&gluing marketing material to extort more monies from people.
This abysmal 2.0 PU release made my point more than anything before it.

Oh well, I hope they at least get Squadron 42 right...
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Nears $100M
23. Re: Star Citizen Nears $100M Dec 12, 2015, 21:27 CJ_Parker
 
Krazy Kat wrote on Dec 12, 2015, 18:00:
Has anyone tried to watch this game on Twitch?

I have never saw a session last more than 15 minutes without crashing.

GG

Well, I fired up my space/flight sim PC tonight to check out 2.0 and let's just say it was the most underwhelming experience ever.
The sad part is that the game has actually gotten worse and much less stable for me.
Last time I played was when ArcCorp was released and I was able to play mostly fine back then but this version is beyond abysmal.

So I have a SLI and surround setup with 3x 1440p screens. The first thing that had to go because of the retarded stretching was the surround thing so I switched to a single 1440p screen.

Next I fired up the hangar and got graphical glitches galore possibly due to my SLI setup (had very similar issues with a flashing screen due to SLI way back when there was only the hangar module). The weird thing is that the issues went away after 30 seconds or so and after running around the hangar a bit. Oooookkkaaayyy...

Then goofed around the hangar for a bit and finally decided to hit the elevator to check back on ArcCorp. Took ages to load, then ran around in ArcCorp for a bit with massive lag/ghosting issues where other players would zap around and teleport all over the place.
Then got the message that the connection to the server had been lost but I could keep playing as if nothing had happened and there were also still other players moving about so the connection was definitely still there... LOLDAFUQ???

OK, so ArcCorp got boring real fast cuz nothing changed and besides it being kinda flashy and pretty there is absolutely nothing to do so I decided to hit space - basic training.
The game crashed on loading.
OK. No problem. Relaunched the game and finally loaded into the training hangar. I never got to leave it though because I had massive performance issues here. The game kept dipping from 40 - 50fps into the single digits every two seconds. No chance at all to even get to my ship, let alone launch into space.
This part actually used to work for me but they managed to fuck it up with this release.

Alright. Then let's check out the new stuff a.k.a the new 2.0 content (I saved the best for last). So I loaded into the area just fine but then the game crashed before I could ever get to my ship (in under three minutes). That's when I decided to call it a day for tonight.

What an abysmal experience at three years in. The most basic functionality is still missing, none of the modes is really stable (anymore), there is no persistence, there are no seamless transitions (using the elevator to switch modules is dumb), the options are extremely limited and pretty much everything gives you the spit&glue impression.
As with Star Wars Battlefront some mouthbreathers seem to be easily wow'ed by pretty graphics but there is zero actual substance to this garbage at this point.
Is it pretty to gawk at if and when it actually works? Fuck yes! Does it actually work? Fuck no!

It's just a rushed release probably to avoid legal action (you need to deliver something 12 months after the initial KS target, right?).

The *theoretical* potential is definitely there. But it will easily take another two/three years before this will be a polished experience as it should be (in single player... you can see and tell already that they will have to massively scale back for flawless multiplayer).
But... hey, Chris! Let's keep promising that FULL persistent universe release for the end of next year to generate more cash! It makes you look real smart and especially trustworthy, honest and like you have a clue!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > The Elder Scrolls Online Free Weekend
6. Re: The Elder Scrolls Online Free Weekend Dec 12, 2015, 17:23 CJ_Parker
 
Rhett wrote on Dec 12, 2015, 17:00:
Isn't the download massive? like 80gb?

Yeah, no thanks... not in a weekend.

About half of that, dude. I got 45.6GB folder size here.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Alpha 2.0
46. Re: Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 Dec 12, 2015, 08:30 CJ_Parker
 
BWWAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA

I hate the ship stealing

I just wanted to test a multi-crew ship with my friend, but I cannot get it to start with him, as there are always someone watching the platforms just to steal my Retaliator or Constellation the moment I open them and they are fair game for everyone in the vincinity.

I hate this. I just want to have cool multi-crew experience and instead I have to rush into the ship, start it and hope nobody else in on board. And after I fell to the floor of the Retalitator the thief who was right behind me flew away with my ship while the Olisar-control told me, that at the moment my ship is not available.... I do not even have the chance for remote self-destruct.

I love 2.0 but I really hate the people who steal other people ships and fly away with it (in Olisar! Not in any PvP-region....) and ruining other players experience. I have begun to write down those names. Because as soon as I can lock the ships those will be people I will not take with me... not with my Constellation, not with my Retaliator and not with my Carrack, Idris or so...
I think it is not funny. And for everyone who says he does not care because it is just testing and all.... - it is about actively ruining my joy with testing and the game - griefing at its best and I will remember those events and people involved accordingly.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Alpha 2.0
39. Re: Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 Dec 12, 2015, 06:18 CJ_Parker
 
Oh yeah... the old white knight Christ Roberts cultist fanboi adage...

BUT... BUTBUTBUT... BUT... IT'S PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-PRE-ALPHA!!!!!!

Yawn.

We are three years in now and all they have to show for it is a single system with some locations, 16 players per instance, a handful of ships (out of dozens) and a fraction (less than 10% surely) of the advertised features.

Sorry but I'm not impressed at all with their "progress". Also sorry for having some standards and expecting more but not everyone can be happy with being lied to, being deceived and then still applaud Christ Roberts for all the shit show. I do have some pride, you know.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Alpha 2.0
36. Re: Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 Dec 12, 2015, 05:49 CJ_Parker
 
Illumin wrote on Dec 12, 2015, 01:46:
jdreyer wrote on Dec 12, 2015, 00:48:
Great White Shark wrote on Dec 11, 2015, 22:50:
Cutter wrote on Dec 11, 2015, 20:19:
That trailer looks exactly like every other one over the last few years. I don't see any real progress there. And the animations still look horrendous.

Uh literally open your fucking eyes? They are making massive strides on this, its finally starting to look like its coming together.

People like you and Derek Smart are going to look pretty dumb if this keeps moving in this direction.

They've delivered one system. Partially. Out of a promised 100. That's like me watching you run a marathon (26.2 miles) and predict you'll be able to finish because you made it to the quarter mile mark.
I have to agree with you here. If they are going with 100 systems all handmade and they want it out anytime withing the next 5 years they better step it up. Im worried its going to be 7 or 8 great systems then 90ish empty voids. Like 99.999% of Elite Dangerous's 400 billion star systems.

In the latest Around the Verse there is a Q&A with Tony Zurovec, the director of the persistent universe who talked about the PU roadmap. From the sounds of it, they are hoping to finish another system (yes ONE more) in the next few months. So we're talking months of dev time for a single system (as expected by anyone with half a brain) but yeah Christ Roberts said at Gamescom that the FULL persistent universe will be working and functioning by the end of 2016.

L to the O to the L.

At the current rate we will be lucky to leave the single digits, i.e. ten systems MAX by the end of next year. Out of a hundred. Unless they do indeed half-ass it and break more promises left, right and center by releasing 90 empty systems with asteroid belts and floating zero G turds.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Alpha 2.0
35. Re: Star Citizen Alpha 2.0 Dec 12, 2015, 05:38 CJ_Parker
 
Flatline wrote on Dec 12, 2015, 00:07:
Parias wrote on Dec 12, 2015, 00:00:
Flatline wrote on Dec 11, 2015, 23:55:
While I need to install this and give it a go to see how it plays, and can't tell if it's fun or not yet, I did say I'd stand corrected and admit I was wrong if they pulled off the tech, and it looks like they're pulling off the tech.

So yes, mea culpa, I was mistaken about many of the things I said.

No, you're doing it wrong! You're supposed to rant endlessly about how this game is IMPOSSIBLE and a SCAM and will NEVER EVER get made, and RANDOMLY CAPITALIZE key words to DRIVE your points home!

I always said I'd rather it work than be right about my pessimism. I'm not 100% on board, but it's promising to finally have a big grip of actual gameplay to demo and get your hands on instead of the lackluster Arena Commander that's been around for so long.

Let's get some perspective here. This crap release that is missing pretty much all of the "FIIIDDDELITEEEEEHHH" that Christ Roberts keeps spouting still only has a fraction of the promised features and they are struggling hard with only 16 players per instance.
You know, a number of players that is even LESS than what they promised would be able to man a SINGLE capital ship.

So let's not get ahead of ourselves here. They have a long, long shopping list of features to implement and need to reach their 50 to 100 players/ships per instance goal.
No one ever doubted that they could pull off this half-assed shit we got here with 2.0 with a dozen players in an instance and a reduced feature set. The doubts are and were always directed at the FULL implementation of ALL stretch goal features and the originally advertised number of ships/players per instance (the original promise was closer to 100 ships per instance by the way).
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3554 Comments. 178 pages. Viewing page 47.
< Newer [ 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo