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

Regularly scheduled events

User information for S Westberg

Real Name S Westberg   
Search for:
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
Nickname Flatline
Email Concealed by request
ICQ None given.
Homepage http://
Signed On Feb 15, 2007, 19:09
Total Comments 2978 (Senior)
User ID 34131
User comment history
< Newer [ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 ] Older >

News Comments > Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month
43. Re: Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month Jul 20, 2015, 13:15 Flatline
Tipsy McStagger wrote on Jul 20, 2015, 12:50:
Flatline wrote on Jul 20, 2015, 12:46:
The 20 million dollar "version" was the "We're going to make this game on our own without 3rd party funding". Same game, just free of the oversight that a 3rd party investor would exercise.

Too bad they hit 20 million, it would have kept them from going off the rails on this fucking crazy train by having a watchful eye on his craziness. Also, i'd probably have my single player game i wanted by now too.. fucking asshole.

As for this FPS module bullshit, I don't believe a word they say... they'll say anything right now to keep the money flowing.

I'm pretty sure if Derek smart was challenging him on unicorns being put into the game as space slingshots he would probably say he'd have that in 6 weeks too.

The interesting thing is that the "complete" vision for the game clocked in at around 20 million budgeted. It's actually probably a good thing funding tore past that because I'll bet 5 bucks they've already blown past 20 million. I suspect the quality of any product turned out at that level of funding would have been a barely playable POS if not cluster-fuck of epic proportions.

I mean, I just went over all the stretch goals, and really the major components to the game stopped at 20 million or so. So I'll give them credit for that. 20 million was what was needed to provide for a "complete" vision of the game.

But it also means that the next 65 million dollars in obligations basically are new ships to be designed. And those don't cost that much money to design and implement. The scope and fidelity of the game really hasn't changed between 20 & 85 million. Which means some pretty optimistic budgeting was going on early on.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month
35. Re: Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month Jul 20, 2015, 12:46 Flatline
Zor wrote on Jul 20, 2015, 11:23:
Kxmode wrote on Jul 20, 2015, 11:03:
we said we hoped it was going to be out sometime in April, but 'don't hold me to that' was what I actually said.

He also ACTUALLY said he needed "20 million dollars" to make this game and we would have a complete game in a beta stage by 2015. I don't believe a word he says. He's a confirmed liar.
You're paraphrasing a lot, though. There's a 20 million dollar version of the game they could have made. There's also a 4 million dollar. But the crowd kept funding and now they are able to make the 85+ million dollar version. Whether you believe that that version was always designed for is up to you.

Err... the 4 million dollar "version" was to "prove that there was adequate interest in the game for deeper pocketed backers to get involved with the funding".

The 20 million dollar "version" was the "We're going to make this game on our own without 3rd party funding". Same game, just free of the oversight that a 3rd party investor would exercise.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month
34. Re: Star Citizen FPS May Come Next Month Jul 20, 2015, 12:41 Flatline
Zor wrote on Jul 20, 2015, 11:10:

I'm really hoping they blow us away with their work on multicrew and large world so that your points about $999 ships and small skyboxes are addressed. The demo is reportedly going to include their sub-light "supercruise" Quantum Drive travel as well, so this shit may actually start to look like a space game in the vastness of space and not a Sim Pod.

Question: How did we go from "the FPS fails at fundamental design levels to be fun and we're basically taking the thing back to design indefinitely and we don't have any estimate of when FPS will be in the game" to "FPS IN THE GAME BITCHES AT GAMESCON!" in literally 3 weeks?

That's like... time for 2-3 basic dev revisions and some QA feedback. Even cramming overtime I'd put the kind of overhaul mentioned in May in like a 6 month range, and that's if everyone knew WTF they were doing.

That narrative strikes me as dishonest in the least, either in the May update (where CR would be engineering a "surprise" at GamesCon) or now by intoning that 2-3 weeks of grokking with people who have developed the CryTech engine un-fuckerated everything to the point where you have a basic framework of time.

We'll see though.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > The Witcher 3 Patch & Free DLC
24. Re: The Witcher 3 Patch & Free DLC Jul 19, 2015, 18:28 Flatline
Rossini wrote on Jul 19, 2015, 17:23:
Cutter wrote on Jul 19, 2015, 14:40:
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Jul 19, 2015, 10:32:
Sounds great... by the time I finish up the first two games and get around to buying this, it should be well patched and deeply discounted.

Mwahahaha! *rubs hands together*

And if you die before then you'll have missed out on one of the best games ever made so far. If there ever was a game worth full price this is it. So don't be cheap and don't miss out.

It sounds like the studio really are keeping things moving. But, I've barely got the hero past the arena bit in Witcher 2 before getting really bored, is Witcher 3 any better?

The "arena" bit isn't actually part of the story is it? Or are you saying you didn't get out of the tutorial before getting bored?

Also, the new controls scheme is MUCH better.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > The Witcher 3 Patch & Free DLC
17. Re: The Witcher 3 Patch & Free DLC Jul 19, 2015, 16:57 Flatline
ForgedReality wrote on Jul 19, 2015, 12:41:
This game is awesome. Freakin' game of the decade. So glad I pre-ordered the Collector's Edition. XD I never do that, and this is one game that actually lived up to its hype. I'm about 70 hours in, and there's still so much more to do. It says 31% complete. I just got to Skellige. I've been taking my sweet-ass time fuckin around with all the content this beast of a game has to offer.

I finally moved on to Skillige because all my quests were grey. I figure I'll go rock those side quests on my second playthrough.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
28. Re: Op Ed Jul 17, 2015, 22:59 Flatline
CDWarden wrote on Jul 17, 2015, 21:03:
I'm not a backer of SC, nor a supporter so I don't think I qualify as a SC "white knight". Even still, this tirade of Smart's is just baffling. He's upset because it is "vaporware"? Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't SC only been in active development for about 2 years, maybe 3? and doesn't your average AAA level title take ... around 4-5? am I wrong?

If Smart thinks that a game of this magnitude can be done in 2 years, and any longer is "vaporware" maybe that explains why all of his projects have been colossal and legendary turds.

Smart has a few different irons in the fire.

1. A lot of people backed a KS which was pitched to us as a spiritual successor to Wing Commander, with an online persistent component and a bunch of other stuff in addition to SQ42. This has kind of gone down the toilet. Very quickly SQ42 took a back seat to SC post-kickstarter. Now we're promised some weird hybrid space sim/BF4/Counterstrike thing.

2. Feature creep/bloat was insane. Even SC is not even the creature it once was. Hence the joking around here about the Space Burrito Shack Franchise Simulator, since the game has assured itself to be basically every genre *except* the match 3 jewels puzzle game, and I'm sure they'll shorehorn that in somewhere. Even on 85 million it seems like a long shot that the game will ever be finished to the specs and fidelity that SC is still boasting it'll have.

3. In voicing his complaints (and pimping his own work by measuring stick/advertisement) on his own personal blog and on Facebook, somehow he's "violated the TOS" of RSI even though as far as anyone can tell he really hasn't. And that means they banhammered him and gave him a refund. They have also in multiple publications very vocally announced that DS violated the TOS multiple times by basically being toxic on their forums and/or chats, which when pressed they admitted wasn't the case. I suspect he got the refund because banhammering him and accusing him of violating the TOS without giving him a refund would actually be a legally stupid move by RSI.

So this whole post is basically DS going HULK RAGE on RSI because they banned him because he spoke his mind on 3rd party websites (specifically his own), and used said trashing to pimp his game.

Now soak those three very reasonable points in a metric shit-ton of ego, glaze with hyperbole, and garnish with some theatricality, and you have the DS posts.

At the core of them are three basically relevant points. And point 3, that you can get banhammered for bitching about SC on your own site or on a 3rd party site, is kind of unsettling to me.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
9. Re: Op Ed Jul 17, 2015, 20:02 Flatline
I don't know if I'm on board with DS's suggestion to do a full on audit of SC. The part of me that revels in schadenfreude jumps at it but honestly I don't know how much of a right I have with my kickstarter pledge to demand much of anything.

What I *would* like to see is an interview with their head designers for a biopsy or ultrasound (as opposed to a post-mortem) of how the fuck their system is all going to work together. I don't need trade secrets or shit but like... how the fuck do you cope with syncing problems between the FPS module where you're boarding a ship and the rest of the universe where shit is flying around? Does that all happen in the same instance or is there two modules passing stateful data back and forth? What is the intent to handle when things fall out of sync? Who wins that battle? Are we talking peer to peer comms or server/clientside? How are you going to deal with the very real latency that emerges at the MMO level due to the daunting amount of data being manipulated in real-time?

This kind of tech has always been talked about in MMO development, yet it's strangely completely missing here.

It's not strange I guess if you figure that they're not worrying about that right now but if you have faith in the project it is a significant missing part.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
3. Re: Op Ed Jul 17, 2015, 19:44 Flatline
I admit that I missed Derek Smart in his Hulk Rage mode. There's a certain poetic quality to the cacophony of ego and trainwreck.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
9. Re: Morning Metaverse Jul 17, 2015, 16:39 Flatline
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Jul 17, 2015, 16:32:
I'll wait for those who are in favor of banning stuff because of feels, agree that SRS, SRD, circlebroke, circlejerk, etc, should be banned first. I believe old age will kick in, even though there's plenty of evidence of users and mods in those subs doxing, harassing, and engaging in behavior that would get any other sub banned.

I don't give a shit about reddit's banning policies as long as it's spelled out and then adhered to.

As Cutter said, their house, their rules. But when the rules are apparently drawn out of a hat or based on emotions or whims that change based on what day it is or some secret code or just lazy-ass management that's a problem.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Cloud Imperium on Star Citizen Refunds
122. Re: Cloud Imperium on Star Citizen Refunds Jul 17, 2015, 16:03 Flatline
Zandog wrote on Jul 17, 2015, 02:41:
Well, I've read both of Derek's blogs, and the following is my opinion:

1) What I find shocking is that this "internet warlord" who is trying to make himself sound objective, spends a lot of the time in his articles touting his own games. That level of narcissism really doesn't help whatever validity in their argument a person may have.

2) Derek admits his posts are full out his own opinions. That's his prerogative to do that. But the thing is, if one is going to make insinuations about wrong doing, you have to provide evidence. The "evidence" he has provided is circumstantial at best, twisting facts to suit one's own agenda at worst. I've heard this kind of weak argument before......from a well known Troll ("M") on here. And he couldn't provide any conclusive proof either. Just a lot of claims. He talks about how SC couldn't possibly succeed in being made. And yet, he offers absolutely no evidence to prove that it can't succeed. All he does is say that because HE couldn't succeed then CIG won't succeed either. That's hardly conclusive proof of anything other than the person making such a claim is full of arrogance and narrow mindedness.

3) Derek talks about "we" but doesn't actually state who those in his "we" crowd are. Now for someone who is calling for transparency, I find this kind of odd.

1. Taking DS at face value, this is easy. There is no proof/transparency from SC other than emails proclaiming all is well (until it isn't) so DS is relying on his real world experience designing a contemporary game and his experiences building games similar in scope with older hardware. Is it a plug for his software? Yeah probably but BFD.

2. In the lack of discussion of how the architecture of SC is going to work even on a fundamental level, we have no proof other than going by experience and looking at other technology. Lots and lots of people have talked about this at length, both in and out of the industry, and *nobody* can come up with an answer as to how this game will function as advertised. At this point a 5 with the Chairman on how the data structure of SC is going to work to pass trillions of items of data around, real time, with no delay, would go a long way to silence the technical critics. But they're silent on that. Very silent.

Legitimate technical questions have been raised. We haven't received any kind of an answer in return. So we're left to do what we can with what we have.

3. Oh FFS grow up. There's a shitload of people who aren't thrilled with SC. He even links to blog entries and shit. What do you want a directory with the names and email addresses of everyone who might share an opinion with DS?
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Brothers In Arms Rearming
14. Re: Brothers In Arms Rearming Jul 17, 2015, 15:54 Flatline
jacobvandy wrote on Jul 17, 2015, 12:13:
I'm glad they ditched that Furious Four crap. I wouldn't be surprised if we see the idea resurface elsewhere, but it was too bizarre for them to give a series like BiA (which they've always touted for its authenticity) the Inglorious Basterds treatment.

I'd rock a cell shaded TF2 art stle Inglorious Basterds like... action stealth game.

Think Splinter Cell Conviction's pace and fast stealth movement combined with the multi-role GTA5 heist gameplay, being able to jump between team members on the fly. All with a Tarantino edge and campy dialogue?

I'd buy that shit in a hot minute.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
11. Re: Evening Metaverse Jul 17, 2015, 11:34 Flatline
Saboth wrote on Jul 16, 2015, 21:47:
Julio wrote on Jul 16, 2015, 20:18:
Did everyone buy the giant barrel of lube on prime day? That's all I saw on sale at a big discount...

I had a really slow day at work, so I could basically just refresh deals over and over. Basically the sale broke down into:

1. Doorbuster, really good deals. Even if you clicked on these the second they came up, it processed for about 20 seconds, then told you the item is sold out, waitlist is full, take a hike, bozo.
2. Lightning deals on stuff. Usually went like this: MSRP: $100, Amazon price: $65. Lightning deal: $59. Not really that great.
3. Stuff like the Amazon gift cards, Kindles, etc. that sold out early in the morning.

All-in-all, it was merely meh. I think most of the items on "sale" were discontinued or last year items being cleared out like a giant rummage sale.

It looked like 60% of the lightning deals were cell phone cases.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Evening Interviews
12. Re: Evening Interviews Jul 17, 2015, 11:32 Flatline
Luke wrote on Jul 17, 2015, 08:41:
if he really wanted to make this ghost he would find a way with or without crowdfunding , but only if he REALLY wanted to do it

Lazy bastarda

He had publisher money lined up. The original KS was to show that there was enough interest in the game to justify the investment.

SC didn't go self-funded until it hit like 20 million or something like that.

Basically this is revisionist history bullshit.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Brothers In Arms Rearming
8. Re: Brothers In Arms Rearming Jul 17, 2015, 11:24 Flatline
I actually rather liked the first one at the time.

If they bring back Brothers in Arms they need to either move to the Pacific and something like Guadalcanal/Peleliu or they need to move *on* from WW2 already.

I'd suggest Korea. It's mostly a forgotten war, and especially the beginnings of it are pretty harrowing for us. We lost most of South Korea and were reduced to defending a tiny perimeter around Puson for a couple months. 17 medals of honor were awarded after the battle. The story of getting hammered back, defending a tiny line against a horde of enemies, and then counter-attacking to stabilize the front lines (into more or less the North/South Korea border now) would make a good story. Most of the hardware would be familiar to WW2 shooters too since it hadn't exactly moved on from WW2 hardware.

If done really well you could probably to a BiA in Vietnam, or maybe in Iraq/Afghanistan, but that might be considered "too soon".
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Gatherings & Competitions
1. Re: Gatherings & Competitions Jul 15, 2015, 17:51 Flatline
Blizzcon's having a talent show?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Dragon Age: Inquisition Free Trial
16. Re: Dragon Age: Inquisition Free Trial Jul 15, 2015, 12:44 Flatline
peteham wrote on Jul 15, 2015, 10:38:
Six hours of SP may be just short of getting players over the initial hump of infinite boredom, if people are anything like me... I ended up really enjoying the game in the end, once the world, story and characters finally kicked in. But Lawd Allmighty, how I struggled for the first 6-8 hours. The combat system is just awful. I tried bumping the difficulty but it went from being dull to infuriating thanks to the party AI and the game not being built for actually using the tactical view. It's just a presentational bullet point.

And there's far too much busywork in the game. And I hated the crafting too. Awful, awful interface. And.. And.. And..

The "world" was amazing though. I'm a huge fan "zone" layouts over just huge contiguous open world. Each area looked amazing and felt really distinct. Exploring was a joy. All in all, I really want to play it again at some point.

But I'll be using a savegame hack that gives me unlimited herbs & minerals so I don't have to harvest another goddamn plant ever again. Stab

Yeah 6 hours will get you to roughly the end of that first zone if you take your time at all. And that first zone did not really grab my attention at all. It's not until really the Inquisition gets rolling that the story got interesting.

Some of the companion side quests were fun though. I really didn't care much for Varric I think his name was since I already was an archer and he just didn't seem interesting... right up until he organized the card game. Which was a really classy moment of storytelling and made me enjoy the character a lot more.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
82. Re: Op Ed Jul 14, 2015, 19:50 Flatline
harlock wrote on Jul 14, 2015, 19:21:
Flatline wrote on Jul 14, 2015, 18:39:
And every. Single. Ship. Has to have that level of fidelity passing back and forth between the FPS and space sim.

Keeping them separate "modules" that pass relevant data back and forth seems like the most approachable way to do that but JFC that's a gargantuan amount of communications because it has to be done, on demand, for every ship in the game.

honestly i wasnt even considering boarded ships being shot, exploded, etc as a possibility but of course it would be required and again im just facepalming hard at the idea that the entire scope of this game would even be possible in the first place ... without getting the entire staff of MIT working on it or having some kind of CIA tech from recovered UFO crashes

but im starting to get the feeling they are gonna scale WAY WAY WAY back pretty soon, and all the people crying about just wanting another wing commander will most likely get it... whether or not it will be worth all this shit (or even good at all) is another story

I wouldn't bother with boarding mechanics if I didn't have the option to sabotage sub-systems and knock out gun batteries and shit.

And if they introduce explosive decompression into the damage model, that means you need to have deformable levels as part of the boarding parties. But not... like... pre-determined because who knows where someone's bomb is going to go off right? We need to mod that level on the fly. Does crytech even *do* geo-modding on the fly?

They would have been better off doing the game in the Bad Company engine
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Cloud Imperium on Star Citizen Refunds
6. Re: Cloud Imperium on Star Citizen Refunds Jul 14, 2015, 19:42 Flatline
Yeah I finally hit the point where I"m looking to sell my account.

Anyone want to buy a Bounty Hunter package without the upgrade?
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
72. Re: Op Ed Jul 14, 2015, 18:39 Flatline
harlock wrote on Jul 14, 2015, 16:16:
Tumbler wrote on Jul 14, 2015, 16:01:
I think it's more likely they'll have a FPS game and a space game and the two shall never meet. (They've said they're going to allow boarding of other ships in space combat and what not but I think we'll probably see a lower level of fidelity there as you're still in the space side,

no, no - it would need to be a creative use of instancing.. to give a rough idea its the same way 3d engines are optimized not to draw the faces of polygons which are not visible

so, you would be able to have all kinds of simultaneous things happening, but it would be instanced so that you are only streamed into the portion of the engine according to what you are doing, and the rest of the global events would be abstracted to a spreadsheet kind of thing which tracks values but doesnt need to compute much beyond that

this is all theoretical.. for example i have no idea how to do instancing without a hard loading screen that separates one world from another, but it would have to be streamed or loaded on the fly in such a way that is not noticeable

i mean, the whole idea of this game from the outset is fucking ludicrous, even if you had a monster AAA studio with 5 years of EA publisher money to back it up ... thats why this indie approach is beyond insane - and again, anyone with half a brain already figured this out

The problem with that is that if I shoot the enemy ship hull right where you're at, the FPS has to model what just happened, in a reasonable time frame (less than 1 second) in your boarding action FPS.

And every. Single. Ship. Has to have that level of fidelity passing back and forth between the FPS and space sim.

Keeping them separate "modules" that pass relevant data back and forth seems like the most approachable way to do that but JFC that's a gargantuan amount of communications because it has to be done, on demand, for every ship in the game.

I can't imagine the processing power alone needed to do that kind of fidelity without some serious partitioning of the universe. And even as cheap as cloud computing can be, I don't see how SC can remain free post-launch. You have to assume that most people who want to play the game have purchased it, you in theory won't be able to buy ships for 500 bucks any more, so you're back to doing 60 dollar transactions.

Then again, I don't see how Elite: Dangerous can sustain it's operating model indefinitely either. But I guess they figured out some way to remain solvent and operational.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Op Ed
70. Re: Op Ed Jul 14, 2015, 18:31 Flatline
Tumbler wrote on Jul 14, 2015, 16:01:

I've been giving some of the technical side of things some thought lately and the main issue I keep coming to is how big of a memory foot print can a game realistically use and be stable? Does any game currently run at higher than 4gb? Even if you require a computer with 4gb you need to leave some alone to run the os and what not so games on pc might typically use at most 3gb. If a game requires 8gb to play then maybe it's up to 4gb+ of stuff loaded into memory.

64-bit architecture, which SC is porting to supposedly right now, can support 16.8 million terabytes of addressable memory.

So... Assuming that your PC needs 3 or 4 gigs to gurgle quietly to itself... about 16.8 million terabytes of memory.

In reality, most processors don't have the adddressing space for that and max out at around 8TB of memory supposedly.

So 7.998TB of memory should theoretically be usable by processors to fuck with a game.

Right now most 64 bit systems seem to be shipping with 8 gigs of memory. 16 is not unreasonable for an enthusiast PC, and the computer I converted over to daily use from my old VMWare lab was running 32 gigs of memory.

That's quite a bit of memory. And really, you're going to hit practical overhead with bandwidth limitations way before the amount of entities a client has to keep track of starts seriously stressing client memory.

Now the servers on the other hand...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
2978 Comments. 149 pages. Viewing page 26.
< Newer [ 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 ] Older >

Blue's News is a participant in Amazon Associates programs
and earns advertising fees by linking to Amazon.


Blue's News logo