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:
San Diego, CA 07/23

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Matt C

Real Name Matt C   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname MattyC
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Description
Homepage None given.
Signed On May 23, 2007, 03:50
Total Comments 730 (Apprentice)
User ID 39012
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 ] Older >


News Comments > Diablo III Game Limits Returning
14. Re: Diablo III Game Limits Returning Jul 17, 2012, 12:12 MattyC
 
wonkawonka wrote on Jul 17, 2012, 11:36:
I have no idea what the cheating is about, but it must be really rampant (and bots must be ruling the roost) because prices in the AH are insane for a normal player, and drops rates are epsilon (and drops are crap anyway).
I played 75 hours, much of it at level 60, quite a bit of it on inferno, and I have YET TO SEE A DROP BETTER THAN YELLOW.

Needless to say I stopped playing.

At 75 hours you either leveled crazy fast or you didn't spend that much time in inferno.

As for the AH, why use it? Farming for items more or less is Diablo. Drops do need to be buffed (they are working on that) but atm yellow more or less is the best.


If anything I would say paranoia from their history with WoW, not a lack of testing lead to most of the negative aspects of the game. They seem far too concerned with hardcore players blasting through the content and burning out. That resulted in overtuned champ packs with underwhelming drop rates.


The game is nothing amazing, but it is hardly a mess either. With the amount of time I have played / fun I have had, it would be absurd to suggest I didn't get my $ worth.

RollinThundr wrote on Jul 17, 2012, 12:00:
ASeven wrote on Jul 17, 2012, 11:38:
Being online-only sure has taken care of all the cheaters and bots and exploits, right??

Ask Krowen, I think he's the single person who bought into that line of bullshit.

Vs D1 or D2 the cheating/exploits have indeed been minimal. Not sure why you ever thought being online only would do a single thing about bots. You are aware of MMO bots yes?
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > UE4 Fortnite PC Release Next Year
17. Re: UE4 Fortnite PC Release Next Year Jul 13, 2012, 09:44 MattyC
 
Omni wrote on Jul 13, 2012, 09:16:
Epic can suck my balls, epic is nothing but a whiny bunch of greedy cunts there goes where the money is.
Fortnite is prolly not even worth pirating.

Yeah, screw those guys that gave us solid editors, mod support, and free mini-expansions. I am totally not going to even pirate their game. What jerks!
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Announced
53. Re: Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Announced Jul 13, 2012, 09:40 MattyC
 
This is beyond strange. Usually people on Blues are hating all over games and I am defending them. Here people are... ok with Ultima 9? I posted a link to the whole series review earlier, but this more or less sums up what I think about Ultima 9. If that is too long for you then this is an excellent short review of U9.

Seriously though, I cannot think of another game that was such a... well... betrayal of fans besides C&C 4.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Announced
46. Re: Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Announced Jul 12, 2012, 20:57 MattyC
 
NegaDeath wrote on Jul 12, 2012, 19:30:
Really now, EA is doing Ultima fans a favor. After this is released EVERYONE will be able to agree on which Ultima is the worst. It'll bring the community together.

I dunno, were we not all in agreement that 9 was really really bad? The review of 9 isn't finished (that I linked earlier) but it really sums up my feelings on the game.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Announced
4. Re: Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Announced Jul 12, 2012, 10:53 MattyC
 
I will just leave this here...  
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
10. Re: Out of the Blue Jul 6, 2012, 11:44 MattyC
 
Interesting. Other than kimchi I haven't had much spicy Korean (though I live in the US). I guess Korean BBQ sauce is usually fairly spicy as BBQ sauce goes. Still, I wouldn't have thought Koreans would have been that into heat. The more you know I guess.  
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
7. Re: Op Ed Jul 5, 2012, 21:04 MattyC
 
Dades wrote on Jul 5, 2012, 20:44:
xXBatmanXx wrote on Jul 5, 2012, 19:27:
What it comes down to is "how many hours have you played"? Anything over 100 hours for a new game is pretty good. Some people like to play games forever, but that is rare. Since it IS Diablo, it shuold probably last a few hundred hours (which it still can if you go through each class like I am).

Oh well. Any game "I" get 100 hours out of, I can't really complain. You can't do anything other form of entertainment (within reason) for less than 50 cents an hour....

What it comes down to is "how many hours have you played and had fun?". I could spend 800 hours grinding in Disgaea but that doesn't mean anything.

Diablo III's big failing is that the time you spend in it isn't as enjoyable as Diablo II. Big shoes to fill but they had plenty of time and a practically unlimited budget to do it. So far they failed. The game didn't need a raiding end game or something stupid, it just needed the developers to not fuck up the things people liked with the Diablo formula. People did the same shit on and off for like ten years in Diablo II, Diablo III is barely lasting a month for many.

I'm sure it was worth the $60 for many people but people rightfully expected a lot more from Blizzard. The name used to mean something.

I would have to regretfully agree. I still think anyone who holds that attitude about StarCraft 2 is crazy. I still really enjoyed D3 and I think it is a good game. If it was made by someone else I might even call it a great game, but for Blizzard? I do feel they slipped a bit. That said, I still think D3 is a pretty good game and feel I got the bang for my buck.

I wish they would give witch doctors a bit of a buff though. I really feel weak in later parts of inferno. So much so that I haven't played the game solo in quite a while unless I am on my DH. I do still play my WD with friends. I just would prefer to play the WD all the time. It is an interesting class that doesn't come up as often as the generic RPG 'classes'. Also the voice acting is quite good.

Either way, I still say the Blizzard tag means something. One pretty good, but not great, game is hardly enough to detract from their past.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > FINAL FANTASY VII Remake Plans
47. Re: FINAL FANTASY VII Remake Plans Jul 4, 2012, 22:49 MattyC
 
PHJF wrote on Jul 4, 2012, 18:40:
You're the second person I've seen recently say Chrono Cross was *bad*. I've always considered it better than any Final Fantasy. When did it become cool to hate on CC???

People who wanted it to be as good as Chrono Trigger I guess? I dunno. I too had a lot of fun with CC, even if it was fairly different.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > FINAL FANTASY VII Remake Plans
18. Re: FINAL FANTASY VII Remake Plans Jul 4, 2012, 13:47 MattyC
 
Linksil wrote on Jul 4, 2012, 12:26:
It's a re-release, not a remake that all the raving fans have been asking for. If you have the old PC version(I do somewhere in storage) then you will see nothing new.

I have to agree with the first posters, I found FF7 as one of the worst ones to date. Even 8 did so much better then 7, but everyone got hooked on 7 first I guess.

Different things for different people I guess, but wow I disagree with that so much.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
15. Re: Out of the Blue Jul 2, 2012, 15:42 MattyC
 
Wallshadows wrote on Jul 1, 2012, 20:04:
Another Grim Fandango with Tim Schafer.

Take all my money.


So much this ^
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Penny Arcade 3 Trailer
3. Re: Penny Arcade 3 Trailer Jun 19, 2012, 12:31 MattyC
 
The 16 bit version of this guy cracked me up I am sad that they abandoned the visual style of the first two. I really liked it. That said, this style obviously has a charm of its own.  
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm "99% Done"
51. Re: StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm Jun 17, 2012, 23:08 MattyC
 
Flatline wrote on Jun 17, 2012, 19:21:
MattyC wrote on Jun 17, 2012, 11:17:
I can't see most of your images. It just errors out with forbidden. However SC2 looks way better than WarCraft 3. I have both on my PC atm and can fire them up. SC2 just looks much better. Your StarCraft 2 screenshots (not sure why you picked low res ones, but it doesn't matter) clearly look better than anything I saw in WarCraft 3.

I am not sure why you threw in the strawman Call of Duty bit. I don't like Call of Duty and unlike the FPS market, the RTS market is fairly barren. Particularly for 'pure' or old style RTS games.

E.g. Company of Heroes, I know a lot of people liked that game, but for me it was a bore. It had no mechanics, no real macro. Maybe I am stuck in the past, but I like that in my RTS. I have had a bit of fun with that style of game like Warhammer DoW and World in Conflict, but it isn't really new (Microsoft's Close Combat).

On release dates? I guess if you cherry pick or are fairly young. StarCraft was in development for quite a while. They even did a full engine rebuild (it originally was more or less WarCraft 2 in space). They also totally canned their adventure game after quite a while in development. And your mentioned Diablo 2? Was in development quite some time. I was hoping to find my original StarCraft jewel case which, IIRC, had some overly ambitious release date for Diablo 2 on it; but I cannot locate it.


Either way I would prefer quality of over quantity. To follow your own comment I don't need my annual Generic War Shooter 20<xx> Men of Wary Brotherly Valor Honor.

My criteria on the screen caps were to find the best looking screenshots, resolution not withstanding, on the first page of Google Image Search. I wasn't about to go through and host all the photos.

And my point wasn't that SC2 looks the same as WC3, my point was that 8 years had past and you saw only iterative improvement over WC3.

The Call of Duty reference is appropriate and amusing, since you find generic war shooters to be shit, but generic RTS games that are 95% copies of previous RTS games to be just fine.

And... wait... You're saying Starcraft was a macro game? BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. SC is *purely* about micromanagement. Anyway, I wasn't talking about Company of Heroes gameplay, I was talking about it's graphics engine, which is 4 years older than SC2, and pumps out far better visuals than SC2. Maybe I should have used pictures of Red Alert 3, which came out 2 years before SC2, uses the same isometric view, and manages to look better than SC2.

Way to try to change the topic and move the goalposts.

And yeah, I'm really cherry picking release dates. I just covered fucking Blizzard's release catalog for 15 YEARS. And my point is still valid, because my original complaint was that 2+ years for a SC2 expansion is bullshit. For proof, I turn to Blizzard's past history, where expansions for just about anything shy of WoW took a year or less to publish. But seriously, 2-3 years to push out a bunch of single player missions and a half dozen new units? That's psychotic, especially when we all know that within the first month all that "polishing" is going right out the window when they rebalance things to reflect reality.

Your credibility is pretty much nil on this argument dude. You say you prefer quality, but let's face it, SC2 is 95% the clone of SC1 with a new graphics engine that would look dated in 2008. SC1 could have released a high rez texture pack/engine patch and a new expansion pack and been 99% of what SC2 was.

10 years for that isn't quality, it's lazy bullshit, and if it was *anyone* other than blizzard, you'd be calling foul on it and you know it. And I reiterate. In the time it took to "create" Starcraft 2, Blizzard also put out the entirity of content for World of Warcraft, from inception to cataclysm. And they still had to patch the living bejeebus out of it to balance things.

Blizzard has never ever catered to the super high system req oh other games. I noted that. I think Sc2 looks good. If you disagree that is fine.

RTS games are far rarer than FPS games, you ignored that point.


Yes SC2 requires macro. I like that. It makes watching and playing the game more fun. Again if you don't like that, fine. I like it and see it as an added skill required element. I changed no 'goalposts'. I was just saying why I liked SC2.

Blizzard, like Valve have their own 'time'. If you haven't noticed this... sorry. It is well acknowledged.

I never asked for credibility, and no SC2 is not that much like SC1 unless you never played it.. :/

Furthermore I have no idea when Blizzard started on Sc2. You can't go off the last release date and say 'yeah bru they were totally working on it since then'. Even if you could, I have no reason to hate on SC2 because of release date. I like the game. You may no, and that is fine. I, however, do and that is just what it is. I am not the Lord of Gaming. I may have fun with some titles you do not and you may have fun with some things I did not. It is just opinion.


That said, calling Sc2 lazy bs is a laugh. Sorry, but that is what it is. SC2 is a solid game.

@shinchan0s I agree that they need a new IP REALLY badly. While I like the remakes, they cannot go on forever.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm "99% Done"
47. Re: StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm "99% Done" Jun 17, 2012, 11:17 MattyC
 
I can't see most of your images. It just errors out with forbidden. However SC2 looks way better than WarCraft 3. I have both on my PC atm and can fire them up. SC2 just looks much better. Your StarCraft 2 screenshots (not sure why you picked low res ones, but it doesn't matter) clearly look better than anything I saw in WarCraft 3.

I am not sure why you threw in the strawman Call of Duty bit. I don't like Call of Duty and unlike the FPS market, the RTS market is fairly barren. Particularly for 'pure' or old style RTS games.

E.g. Company of Heroes, I know a lot of people liked that game, but for me it was a bore. It had no mechanics, no real macro. Maybe I am stuck in the past, but I like that in my RTS. I have had a bit of fun with that style of game like Warhammer DoW and World in Conflict, but it isn't really new (Microsoft's Close Combat).

On release dates? I guess if you cherry pick or are fairly young. StarCraft was in development for quite a while. They even did a full engine rebuild (it originally was more or less WarCraft 2 in space). They also totally canned their adventure game after quite a while in development. And your mentioned Diablo 2? Was in development quite some time. I was hoping to find my original StarCraft jewel case which, IIRC, had some overly ambitious release date for Diablo 2 on it; but I cannot locate it.


Either way I would prefer quality of over quantity. To follow your own comment I don't need my annual Generic War Shooter 20<xx> Men of Wary Brotherly Valor Honor.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm "99% Done"
44. Re: StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm Jun 16, 2012, 23:17 MattyC
 
Flatline wrote on Jun 16, 2012, 14:29:
MattyC wrote on Jun 16, 2012, 01:40:

SC2 was fun if you liked RTS games and has a large online community.

I've played, and loved, RTS games since Dune 2.

SC2 could have been pumped out in less than 2 years by a competent studio, given how much of the game was redundant. It's an average RTS, bringing absolutely nothing new to the table, and not even refining what it *did* bring to the table beyond a moderate graphics overhaul.

Considering that the "expansion" will hit 2 years of dev time next month, to add new SP missions and like 6 units. In reality, I suspect a holiday 2012 release, if not a 2013 release, because Blizzard has no idea how to work with alacrity any more.

And finally, "polishing and balancing" the game is bullshit. We all know in the first week or two everything will be nerfed/overhauled/changed anyway. Open up a public beta on a few different maps for a week and record everything about those games and then use that to balance shit. Spending more than a few months in private testing for "balance" purposes is bullshit and idiotic these days. It's fine for bugging, terrible for balancing.

I don't really care how long it took them or why. Blizzard has never EVER been fast on their feet with releases; no idea what you mean by anymore. I am fine with that. I also don't mind that it didn't revolutionize the genre. In fact I was getting bored with all the 'revolutionary' RTS titles. I just wanted a good, solid, fun RTS. Blizzard gave me that. Easily one of the best RTS games I have played with a solid online ladder. I guess we just have to agree to disagree, because I had a blast with it and am looking forward to HOTS.

Also if you think SC2 was a 'moderate graphics overhaul' then you either never played Brood War or played SC2 on something you constructed out of sticks and bits of pocket lint. It isn't the most beautiful game ever made (Blizzard has never been a Crysis style graphics thing - fine by me, I hated Crysis) but come on... Moderate? Really?
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm "99% Done"
24. Re: StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm Jun 16, 2012, 03:22 MattyC
 
Creston wrote on Jun 16, 2012, 03:07:
Yifes wrote on Jun 15, 2012, 22:32:
Creston wrote on Jun 15, 2012, 22:27:
I might be interested, but it depends very heavily on the price. Anything over 20 bucks and they can go fuck themselves.

Creston

Blizzard has never priced their expansions at $20.

I know. And they won't even price this as an expansion anyway. 50 or 60 bucks guaranteed.

At which price, they can happily go fuck themselves.

Creston

They have said they will price it as an expansion, so basically you are just making things up as you go. Blizzard pricing has been high, but it has also been consistent since at least the 90s.

Ranting without any info is just as bad as those people complaining they were 'splitting the game into 3' even though Wings of Liberty was longer than StarCraft 2.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm "99% Done"
19. Re: StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm Jun 16, 2012, 01:40 MattyC
 
mag wrote on Jun 16, 2012, 00:50:
Kitkoan wrote on Jun 16, 2012, 00:04:
Yifes wrote on Jun 15, 2012, 22:32:
Creston wrote on Jun 15, 2012, 22:27:
I might be interested, but it depends very heavily on the price. Anything over 20 bucks and they can go fuck themselves.

Creston

Blizzard has never priced their expansions at $20.

Blizzard also said that each one was going to be its own game, not an expansion so no doubt will be full priced. The price tag is for the campaign.

On a different note, my guess is the last 1% needed to finish is how to shoe-horn Diablo 3's always online DRM into this. And why wouldn't they? Did it with Diablo 3 and the customers loved it so much, they voted with their wallets and made Diablo 3 the best selling game of May. This tells Blizzard that people love always online DRM the most

Doesn't SC2 already have the always-on DRM? I thought you had to log in to play? No? (Never bought it)

Ugh, so much misinformation in the comments.

SC2 has offline mode like with Steam games.

SC2 is an expansion and will be priced as such.

SC2 was fun if you liked RTS games and has a large online community. It has also formed into a solid 'esport'. Different things for different people I guess, but I just don't get the guy who thought SupCom 2 was better

That said, don't let me ruin the uninformed hate fest.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Diablo III Item Duping Hotfixed? RMAH to Require Authenticator
21. Re: Diablo III Item Duping Hotfixed? RMAH to Require Authenticator Jun 11, 2012, 13:00 MattyC
 
ASeven wrote on Jun 11, 2012, 12:06:
But...but... being always online meant no item duping and bots!!!!11!!!

Yeah, in the end the excuses they made to put this game online always ended up happening anyway.

In another topic, master fanboi Krovven once again shows why he's quite the idiot.

To be fair this isn't really duping. They just used that word to grab views. It is an exploit, but to the crafting and checkpoint system, hardly a dupe.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > John Carmack's VR Headset
2. Re: John Carmack's VR Headset Jun 6, 2012, 21:55 MattyC
 
HorrorScope wrote on Jun 6, 2012, 21:54:
To the link:
"You know what's amazing? They're
not that noticeable on your face."

That said, this is where I'm ready to go to.

A VR setup could be interesting, but it would have to be very interesting for me to prefer it to a monitor. The rest of the VR just wouldn't be there.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > etc., etc.
12. Re: etc., etc. Jun 1, 2012, 09:02 MattyC
 
shihonage wrote on Jun 1, 2012, 01:23:
Blizzard ignored and openly mocked the 64,000-strong petition about the game's retarded theme park visuals, so good luck with this one.

Not only they will ignore it, even if they chose to honor it, it would take too much work to write client-side code for the game, because it never had any.

Why it never had any? Because WoW never had any, and Diablo3 is a branch-off from WoW engine circa, I'd guess, 2007 or so.

says the person that clearly never saw any of Diablo 3...
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Epic Wins Case Versus Silicon Knights
25. Re: Epic Wins Case Versus Silicon Knights May 31, 2012, 21:37 MattyC
 
Wolfen wrote on May 31, 2012, 04:21:
Beamer wrote on May 31, 2012, 00:34:
Wolfen wrote on May 31, 2012, 00:27:
Beamer wrote on May 30, 2012, 23:24:
Man, it's obvious who here hasn't been in a studio using UE3.


No support? Have you ever tried anyone elses' engine? UDN is pretty much amazing.

I second your sentiments.

The entire reason UE3 became an industry standard is because Epic hired people to make easy-to-use tools and hired people to actually explain those tools, create tutorials and answer questions. You know, people to train and support. From there it snowballed, but some of the claims here are baffling and clearly coming from people that dislike Epic and not people that have used a variety of engines in a professional (or even academic) setting. Plus it has anti-aliasing, it has FOV controls, and it supports DX11 in ways that likely make it the single most advanced engine out there right now despite claims in here that "it's flawed and only supports consoles." Sorry, guys, but no console can run the stuff shown in last year's Samaritan demo - that was all PC exclusive.
Hate Epic all you want, but try to at least remain factual with your UE3 bashing. Some of the stuff said in this thread is so far incorrect you may as well be making it up. "UE3 only runs on TI-82 graphic calculators and only supports the color pink!"

Also, I still haven't played many games without texture pop-in (or, actually, any FPS that I can think of), nor does it matter much to me as it only happens within the first 15 seconds of a level loading. I see it as an issue, but not a big one. Would people prefer it loads levels 15 seconds longer? Or do you guys get it when you turn, like in Rage when it first launched? I've never seen texture caching issues in UE3 after the first few seconds of a level. Or, really, in anything but Rage.

Coming from a fan of the id tech engines (tools, namely radiant) and having used UE3, LithTech, other Proprietary engines, and various other tools, Unreal Tech is my favorite to work with "content" wise.

I am fairly out of date (having only really played around with early version of UED), but Epic has always had good tools with Unreal engines in my opinion. Even back with the original Unreal the editor and mod support were just top notch, particularly when compared to everything else. From what I saw when I toyed with UED that tradition has continued.

@Stinging the 360 version had some crappy popin textures and annoying elevator loading times. That was really about it. You had some FPS drops in big fights, but that is generally a 'yeah console' thing. Not sure where you are getting broken from.
 
Avatar 39012
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
730 Comments. 37 pages. Viewing page 18.
< Newer [ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo