User information for J W

Real Name
J W
Nickname
Veterator
Email
Concealed by request - Send Mail
Description
Homepage
Signed On
July 6, 2007
Supporter
-
Total Posts
508 (Apprentice)
User ID
41737
Search For:
Sort Results:
Ascending
Descending
Limit Results:
 
508 Comments. 26 pages. Viewing page 5.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16    26  ] Older
5.
 
Re: etc., etc.
Aug 14, 2012, 03:54
5.
Re: etc., etc. Aug 14, 2012, 03:54
Aug 14, 2012, 03:54
 
Think about how much time they waste trying to put DRM in, keep DRM working, and selling DRM as a bonus instead of a negative.


I don't expect perfection in my games....I do however expect exploits to be dealt with in MP. And game stopping bugs to be very hard to reproduce if they exist in all game modes.

Plus the game has to be fun, but I think that part gets left out because it isn't working and they don't have time to fix it before release.

But at least she's attractive, so you got some eye candy to look at while they boldly feed you bullshit.
3.
 
Re: Evening Safety Dance
Aug 14, 2012, 03:00
3.
Re: Evening Safety Dance Aug 14, 2012, 03:00
Aug 14, 2012, 03:00
 
I have to wonder if they've truly ejected the people from their systems in some of these cases. If you believe you're invincible and they keep letting you believe that.....you probably are going to be shocked enough when you catch one break in to potentially ignore the constant ongoing ones.
2.
 
Re: TF2 Mann vs. Machine Update Wednesday
Aug 13, 2012, 21:42
2.
Re: TF2 Mann vs. Machine Update Wednesday Aug 13, 2012, 21:42
Aug 13, 2012, 21:42
 
Wondering what they mean by earning incredible loot. Changing the way the loot system works? Or is it specific to this game mode and can only be used in it?

15.
 
Re: etc., etc.
Aug 13, 2012, 02:45
15.
Re: etc., etc. Aug 13, 2012, 02:45
Aug 13, 2012, 02:45
 
nin wrote on Aug 12, 2012, 11:28:
Veterator wrote on Aug 12, 2012, 02:48:
Only thing the game added combat wise was cover, and using it was friggin annoying.

Yeah, I never cared for that, as a smuggler...

"Ok, you attack, and I'm gonna go hide behind that rock for a second!"

I mean it looked OK when you used environment ones, it just never worked worth a crap. And your DPS/etc suffered because you had to rely on this weird mechanic that never worked very well and left you fighting in the open most times because you had to move for all the knockbacks and stuff.
13.
 
Re: etc., etc.
Aug 12, 2012, 02:48
13.
Re: etc., etc. Aug 12, 2012, 02:48
Aug 12, 2012, 02:48
 
Only thing the game added combat wise was cover, and using it was friggin annoying.
15.
 
Re: Gatherings & Competitions
Aug 11, 2012, 04:52
15.
Re: Gatherings & Competitions Aug 11, 2012, 04:52
Aug 11, 2012, 04:52
 
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Aug 11, 2012, 01:24:

Not everyone is equipped to smash faces. Sometimes safety in numbers and the protection of others is the best you can hope for. Of all of those groups you mention, how many cases of "hate-crime" violence are there for them in recent years? I bet only one or two stand out. There's a difference between being laughed at and having people believe you're an abomination in the sight of God, deserving of death and eternal damnation. Yeah, those people are insane, but there happens to be a lot of them that fall near that end of the spectrum.

I really don't have much respect for people who use religion as an excuse to do evil shit. Or people in general who think it's funny to bully or intimidate. And I realize this happens in games a lot. Hell Tribes Ascend, in one match the other day I probably had 4 players repeatedly giving me shit anytime they killed me or I killed them. I just let them carry on for 3-4 rounds doing their dumbshit, then I called them out on it...and people laughed at them and they stopped. Not in any particular racial slur way, but it's just the general attitude of a LOT of gamers, you're either part of the community in their head or not. You either play the way they want you to play or they pick on you. Etc etc.

Personally I think the game developers don't discourage it enough, it's why you see publisher/developer forums just filled with people flaming/fanboying it up comments. It's seriously not conducive to a discussion where a big majority of the people are simply not heard or refuse to speak because there's a little cluster of shitheads who spend all of their time driving people off.

I haven't heard any news of these guys physically attacking people at events, but the fact that their attitude is tolerated at many stages in the gaming community pretty much guarantees that these shithead attitudes are going to persist no matter how you try to divide yourselves up.


I understand why they want to do it, and I even sympathize with them on it. But I don't think they are going to end up with the results they expect, in fact I think it will just escalate the anti-gay commentary. Especially if you ever get identified as going to those events, they'll single you out if you ever try to play with the non-event attendees.

Now if they want to organize a place where people can comment on what they like and don't like about games and not get shouted down (like what happens in damn near every game specific forum ever). Have events where the game devs show up and it isn't a raging mass of screaming, drooling idiots..... They'd be creating a place where people would prefer to go. It doesn't need to be targeted at gay people to be civil. I think a whole lot of people would like some civility injected back into games, because it's more fun to joke around instead of having people continually calling everyone noobs, spamming voice chat, and generally being a shithead.

If every group I mentioned previously got offended and made their own gaming group....shitheads will just join whatever group and hate on the people not in their group. Gay people can be shitheads too.
8.
 
Re: Gatherings & Competitions
Aug 10, 2012, 23:27
8.
Re: Gatherings & Competitions Aug 10, 2012, 23:27
Aug 10, 2012, 23:27
 
Well if we're basing it on what kind of insults get thrown out.

We'll need safe places for:

30+ or 40+ yo virgins.

People who live with their parents.

People who live in their parents basement.

Anyone who works in fast food.

Each and every racial group, because they kinda throw those out like candy.

Rednecks, people with heavy southern accents...etc. Just so people don't assume they are hooking up with family members or animals.

Furries.

Asians who are bad at math.

Fat people, everyone hates fat people now.

And probably a whole lot of other insults/stereotypes and what not that are throw out to upset people in games.


Some of the above are things you can't keep to yourself (race, accent, fatness), unlike your sexuality, but even the people part of those groups and insulted by the barbs online probably would feel silly setting up a special game event.

Are they going to test your gayness? What if you're a gay that
insults gays?

I mean more power to them, but a whole lot of people get insulted in games in a whole lot of ways. Showing you are intimidated/affected by it just means they win.

Hell I had a relative who was deaf with other handicaps and people used to make fun of the deaf group he hung out with....until they picked up a big bulky deaf member who threatened to and started beating the shit out of those people. That's what those kind of people respond to, having their face smashed.
39.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Aug 10, 2012, 09:16
39.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Aug 10, 2012, 09:16
Aug 10, 2012, 09:16
 
Beamer wrote on Aug 9, 2012, 22:07:
The housing crisis didn't begin with the bankers (who had nothing to do with it), lenders (who had enormous amounts), traders (who had less), or borrowers (who also had enormous amounts.)

It started with the government. The government changed the rules. In order to make loans accessible to anyone it changed the laws to encourage loans going out to people with bad credit. Lenders swept in and started offering loans to people that they knew likely couldn't pay it back, because the government changed regulations so that these people could. The lenders immediately sold these loans to traders, most of whom had no idea what was going on.

Borrowers were taking loans they knew they couldn't pay.
Lenders were giving them, and as someone that sadly spent a year doing operations/marketing at one of these right out of college, I can tell you most were bending rules for this. I didn't see it first hand, as the ops guys ran my company in a constant struggle with sales guys, but the stories we heard from other companies... and the photoshopped documents we got from borrowers to try to support their loans...
Traders were backing and trading these without a clue.

But it all stemmed from the government relaxing regulations stupidly.





Also, I'm ok with people mocking Obama for being owned by corporations as long as they aren't stupid enough to act as if the Republicans aren't even more in debt to corporate overloads. If the Democrats are 99% the Republicans are 105%.

And yet we continue to hear from those same people about how we need less regulation to really progress.

I guess the question goes back to, why would the government relax regulation on an industry unless they were being asked to/paid to/whatever else to.

I have yet to see the laws changed because a handful individuals want them changed, it takes a overwhelming majority of people to make it happen...and most can't even agree on where to eat in a group of 4.

Plus, even after the regulation was relaxed, they were selling these bad loans at the highest credit rating despite knowing full well they weren't. I highly doubt the government gave a green light to that before or during, but it seems they did after with the lack of prosecution taking place.

And all the rumors of people not having to substantiate how much they made or their worth when applying for loans, just put in a number. Which often times the lender would fill in for you, falsely of course, or change after you applied to make you more appealing....were allegations of that going on to. I remember a story of a guy who never made over 60 grand in his life in any one year, and his loan had him down at about 10 times what he made in a good year.


That kind of stuff, if isolated would be easy to find and prosecute. I think it was pervasive and they just threw their hands up and said screw it at some point, because if they started putting people on the chopping block there wouldn't be many left.

Stories of guys just out of college chumming up to the movie stars, buying the place champagne and having obscene amounts of money because they were lending and bundling these bad loans up and selling them. Etc etc....

In the end it sounded a lot like the ruins of a ponzi scheme. With the home owners being at the bottom (all of them whether they borrowed or not). And the corporations management at the top, because those bonuses were paid out even during the bailouts or perhaps even with the bailouts.

And this all proceeds the illegal foreclosures and what not we hear in the news all the time. And it also sets the standard that they can both take bail out money, which presumably was given to them to stabilize the market so a whole lot of people didn't end up out of their house....and they still end up foreclosing despite the bail out. So they get the bailout money, the house, and any breaks for holding foreclosed properties in a down market.

The whole thing stinks of BS, like it was a concerted effort to screw as many people as possible before it burst. Rational people wouldn't flood/kill their area of expertise like that...they want steady business. Not flood/drought business cycles because it's too volatile to take a chance and expand.

My overall point is, actual value/money was lost and no one seems to be straightening that shit out, protecting against it happening again, prosecuting people who abused/cheated the system with deception. Where as in Dotcom case we have virtual maybe money if a whole lot of criteria is met, and they are busting out all the influence to make sure something happened fast in spite of actual procedure. In a completely different country and on a far less all encompassing scale....he might have had an impact on more people than a mugger, but certainly less than a global economic meltdown and the people who clowned around during it.

The scale of the crime, if huge, seems to warrant no response...or even free money.

GSK fiasco is another great example of BS. Guys pushing drugs via bribery for unapproved treatments and they got fined. Where's the raiding and the beating, they were endangering lives with that shit. Not to mention creating an environment of distrust in the doctor/patient relationship where the money/vacations/madonna tickets means more than your health potentially.


It pays to go big in your crime is the bottom line, no arrests, fines that don't even eliminate half the profits from your crimes don't seem very punitive. And as individuals in these companies, it's not like your take home pay is in danger......even though you knew you were doing illegal shit. Can't help but shake my head at the inconsistent application of laws where crime takes place and yet there's not even a trial to punish the responsible parties...just fines.

This comment was edited on Aug 10, 2012, 19:51.
29.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Aug 9, 2012, 20:19
29.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Aug 9, 2012, 20:19
Aug 9, 2012, 20:19
 
Beamer wrote on Aug 9, 2012, 17:33:
Veterator wrote on Aug 9, 2012, 15:36:
Most CEOs in the US are douches, when are they going to bust in their doors and beat em up some while they seize their assets and holdings? Or the bankers.......

Has to be easier to bust them for douchebaggery and illegal practices when they are in the same country as the people pushing for it.

Dotcom needs to beef up on his white collar crime if he wants to run with the big dogs.



Most CEOs and bankers don't do anything illegal. Hell, most CEOs and bankers don't do anything shady. They're jerks, but doing everything 100% within the law.

Which is why the laws may be an issue, but tell that to RollinThunder.



Even most traders, which is probably what you mean when you say "bankers," don't do anything particularly bad, but it's their culture that's really screwing everything up (and, at this point, I think most people will never understand the difference between an investment banker and a trader. I'm always surprised the media doesn't actually use proper terms. Traders are not bankers, they're greedy monkeys with terminals.)

Similar boat in my mind.

Dotcom may or may not have been profiting directly from copyright infringement. They threw the law out the window instead of building a proper case and went after him.

CEOs/whoever may be in charge of companies may or may not be breaking employment laws by requiring Facebook logins and other information on people that is in direct violation to protected classes and other criteria they aren't allowed to ask about. Divorced, have kids, planning to have kids, gay, straight, member of whatever political group, etc.

Hell companies doing 5 year long wage freezes despite posting a lot of profits to me seems like another questionable thing they should be investigating. Not temporary wage freezes, minimum period wage freezes. Caterpillar was going for 6 year wage freezes.

Bankers/traders/lenders/mortgage handlers. I frankly can't tell where the housing crisis began or ended in that group of people. It seemed like everyone hand their hand in the jar and fueled the frenzy despite all indicators and basic common sense. Kept telling people everything was great and kept on lending. Then after it busted, which they had a large hand in, they had many instances of illegal foreclosures. They broke into a guy's home and "winterized" after he just bought it.

Hell on another forum was reading about a guy who was unable to buy a house because the bank who was trying to short sale it was operating in bad faith and wasn't disclosing the existence of liens on the property. Trying to handle them by delaying the process and kept silent until they couldn't hide it any longer.

I mean .....this stuff is right up to the line of fraud if not outright fraud. Why aren't they being busted? They are in the US doing this stuff. They are hurting real people's funds and homes, not imaginary copyright infringement bucks. Yet the imaginary funds gets the assault squads..and can't even seal the deal because they borked it.

The obvious answer is that busting corporations and their employees doesn't aid corporations. And when it comes between corporations, the one with the deepest pockets gets to choose what happens to the less influential companies. I always like to ask myself, would an individual doing this to another individual be in jail? If the answer is probably yes, then the law should be applied the same to corporations. If the answer is no, then the corporation is probably as close to "good" as it can be considering how favorable the laws are toward them versus the individual.


23.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Aug 9, 2012, 15:36
23.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Aug 9, 2012, 15:36
Aug 9, 2012, 15:36
 
Most CEOs in the US are douches, when are they going to bust in their doors and beat em up some while they seize their assets and holdings? Or the bankers.......

Has to be easier to bust them for douchebaggery and illegal practices when they are in the same country as the people pushing for it.

Dotcom needs to beef up on his white collar crime if he wants to run with the big dogs.


5.
 
Re: Evening Metaverse
Aug 9, 2012, 08:06
5.
Re: Evening Metaverse Aug 9, 2012, 08:06
Aug 9, 2012, 08:06
 
Blackmail is the only explanation. Use the "job compensation" as a way to pay him off.
42.
 
Re: Steam Adding Non-Gaming Titles
Aug 8, 2012, 16:04
42.
Re: Steam Adding Non-Gaming Titles Aug 8, 2012, 16:04
Aug 8, 2012, 16:04
 
Don't think their distribution systems could handle both games and apps being on sale at the same time.


I just hope they let you control what you see content wise, because I really disliked Newegg showing home appliances to me on their main page when I was there to look for deals on PC stuff. When before all I had to look at there was PC related stuff.

Like I know they let you control if DLC shows up on some of the lists and what not. So I think they can do it, I just hope they divide the store pages well enough to appease people who only want to see games or apps....and separate their sales on each to different times so you don't have to check various parts of their catalog for sales throughout the day/week.

Other than that, if they host some of the virus scanners/malware/etc stuff in their free versions at a minimum it could be useful. It'd certainly make it easier for people familiar with Steam to get these things to clean their own systems rather than hunting them down via browser searches. My brother picked up a virus that disabled his browsers, that was a new one to me.
4.
 
Re: Evening Metaverse
Aug 7, 2012, 22:04
4.
Re: Evening Metaverse Aug 7, 2012, 22:04
Aug 7, 2012, 22:04
 
Any reason to raise prices is a good reason. That's how it works now.
5.
 
Re: Morning Metaverse
Aug 6, 2012, 23:07
5.
Re: Morning Metaverse Aug 6, 2012, 23:07
Aug 6, 2012, 23:07
 
Right now AFAIK cloud computing is more of a business thing. Small to medium businesses start dumping all of their data to the net, securing it depending on how they need to access it. No need for backups (flawed thinking IMO), easily expandable storage, access from anywhere (flawed thinking again IMO), secure (very flawed thinking).

The selling point is supposed to be lower costs because you don't need the kind of hardware and technical support you would need if you did it in house. So you theoretically don't need a robust server, a backup plan, or someone capable of pulling your ass out of the fire when something goes wrong...because nothing will go wrong....it's in the cloud.

Larger companies/schools use it for data processing, mining, etc. Not so much storage as computing power they can use without having to buy a dedicated setup.

The word is that any of those hosted data is basically open to the US government, and a lot of foreign schools are told not to use these services under any circumstances due to this alleged access they have.


Then we have cloud computing for the consumer side, which.......using cloud computing as a term that means "on the net" is a stupid way to distinguish things...it's a muddled terminology at this point. Just all encompassing to the point of being meaningless, besides using it as a buzzword. I believe on the consumer side, they want you to basically turn all your data storage over to them. Moving back to like someone else said, terminal based computing. Where instead of a keyboard and monitor with a little functionality on your side and the meat of it being over the LAN, now it's your PC to their server over the net.

There being a definite control/licensing issue with anything "online", instead of being a ownership issue in the "offline" aspect. And I'll bet beyond the security, viruses attacks, data loss, etc....there ends up being the issue of ownership. If you use their tools to create something and aren't paying for the service (using a free portion or something) that your work will magically become their property if they ever choose to claim it. Offline, at least theoretically, they should not be able to tell wtf you are doing. Online, they could track your progress, copy it, steal it, etc. And there's very little in their EULAs to cover you from them, but plenty to protect them from you.

Basically, once it gets too comfortable...one of them is going to give everyone a good fucking and the rest will follow in their footsteps because they never get punished significantly to keep it from being profitable and laws can't stay within 20 years of relevancy and hope to remain fair anymore due to special interests.

This comment was edited on Aug 7, 2012, 02:36.
3.
 
Re: PlanetSide 2 Beta Beginning; Steam Confirmed
Aug 6, 2012, 16:24
3.
Re: PlanetSide 2 Beta Beginning; Steam Confirmed Aug 6, 2012, 16:24
Aug 6, 2012, 16:24
 
I think Tribes only gets big populations on weekends. Their double XP weekends or whatever are the times when you don't end up playing the same people every day throughout the day. Otherwise weekdays I'll see the same 10-15 people very often, on weekends maybe 5 of that 10-15.

It's more consistent now that they group by rank, but it was still a pretty regular group of people playing at certain times before that change.

So I'd guess they maybe have a steady group of 5-8k players per server hub, with it spiking up to 15-20k on the XP weekends. Really hard to judge on how many people overall throughout the day, but I'm thinking 5k people seems pretty reasonable for a weekday.

And looks like I won't be getting into PS2 beta for at least another week as a vet.

13.
 
Re: Vanguard Goes F2P Next Week
Aug 5, 2012, 22:51
13.
Re: Vanguard Goes F2P Next Week Aug 5, 2012, 22:51
Aug 5, 2012, 22:51
 
Game crashed like clockwork for me, was the major reason I stopped playing. It didn't perform very well either, but the crashing and fairly heavy death penalties and equipment retrievals got old pretty quick. Dunno how many times I crashed ran across the zone and died by falling into a pit or location I had never been before. Just made it infuriating to try to play when an hour of shitty crashes would reset your days worth of play.

2.
 
Re: etc.
Aug 3, 2012, 18:42
2.
Re: etc. Aug 3, 2012, 18:42
Aug 3, 2012, 18:42
 
Smedley says a lot of things. DCUO is a decent recent example of him saying a lot of stuff and then directly countering it just a few months later.

If a guy who didn't have a history of not fulfilling what he said came along and was honest like that even if he had almost no history, I'd feel better than a known entity like himself doing it.

I won't call him a liar, because maybe he meant it when he said it. But meaning it really doesn't add up to much if you can just throw it away later and continue on to other "I really mean it this time" things.

79.
 
Re: The Old Republic F2P This Fall
Aug 2, 2012, 20:04
79.
Re: The Old Republic F2P This Fall Aug 2, 2012, 20:04
Aug 2, 2012, 20:04
 
Bhruic wrote on Aug 2, 2012, 09:03:
Veterator wrote on Aug 1, 2012, 23:09:
I am not sure we have the computing capability to do it, but it doesn't seem like anyone is even looking in that direction.

Oh, something like that could be doable. But you're overlooking human behaviour. You're always going to have people who find it more fun to ruin other people's experience than to do something on their own. Who's going to be interested in building things when you know that when you log off, someone can come along and destroy it all?

The trouble with so many of the truly interesting concepts when it comes to large-scale cooperative gaming is that they tend to rely on people having a cooperative mindset that just doesn't translate into reality. It's extremely difficult (hence why it hasn't been done) to create something truly open, and not have people end up abusing it.

Well that is kind of the point as well. You can't just build something and call it good until the end of time either.

You obviously can't have a system where someone can ruin the project from the safety of your own faction where there are no repercussions, checks, or blocks to prevent it.

But you also can't just build something and have enemy factions unable to sabotage, destroy, or otherwise counter it.

If you can prevent your own factions/side/whatever from ruining it, everything else is part of the game IMO. Aside from glitches, hacks, etc. If a clearly enemy player can get into your works and mess it up, it must not be important enough to warrant people monitoring/guarding/etc it.

In my head I see it like this: Personal projects are possible, but you're going to be building them in centralized and well protected places if you want to make any progress on them. Group/guild projects are possible in the less central areas, but definitely not on the enemy lines. On enemy lines you'll need the cooperative, massive scale efforts to pull off what would be trivial elsewhere. Guards, defenses, supply line protection, etc.

It could be something simple as permissions to enter sites of your own faction, or a reputation system. Bounty system to take out contracts on people who work against their fellows. It'd be quite easy to have 2k people come up with the sum to get a sizable bounty on someone who purposefully hindered your project. Versus say having one person take out the bounty on someone they don't like....if you do your bounty system correctly.

I favor the bounty system, because it has implications beyond just cooperative efforts. Perhaps you have someone who is cheating people on prices or is otherwise messing the game up for a load of other people. Get a bounty on him, make all of his belongings and cash steal-able by same faction entities through in-game systems and authorities. It'd be interesting to let the players police their population to some degree, with oversight from the devs/GMs for groups abusing it.

Far too many of the MMOs today let a lot of players get away with very questionable things, and there are no repercussions players can take against them. The best example is in WoW where people steal from the guild bank in large quantities. You can barely do anything to them if they stay on server. And less if they switch servers during a free move. And that's a cooperative environment (in some sense) that if you limit it too much it's useless. So you're stuck opening yourself up to people thieving with no way to punish them. They could remedy this if they really wanted to.


77.
 
Re: The Old Republic F2P This Fall
Aug 1, 2012, 23:09
77.
Re: The Old Republic F2P This Fall Aug 1, 2012, 23:09
Aug 1, 2012, 23:09
 
KS wrote on Aug 1, 2012, 13:59:
Veterator wrote on Jul 31, 2012, 20:38:
I like class based games when they are done well. I think WoW did a good job with it's classes, they have some overlap, enough that you can pick the class which will give you the alternate play styles you want in most cases.

And I don't care much for COMPLETE sandbox MMOs because you end up too scattered and unfocused as a player base. There's no easy way to focus people over all into an effort without some kind of incentive/story/quest/progression line to follow. However what disappoints me about modern MMOs is that they have not evolved into allowing players to truly modify the world. Maybe not to the extent of Minecraft where you could empty the world of blocks if you wanted, but that you could sculpt it somewhat. And create new lanes of travel with a concerted effort amongst the player base. Not just a single guild, but double digit percentages of your player base per server working toward it.

But it would be interesting if you could wipe out an enemy species or race, kill a forest, create a lake, divert a river to flood a valley or cut off water supply to an area. You would actually have to protect yourself, your domain, and surrounding domains from people trying to do this stuff to you. Beyond fighting in a dungeon or exploring the world if you want it to mean anything to others. Which I believe is the point of an MMO, your actions should impact others. Positively if you're on their side, negatively if you're against their side.....generally.


Believe it or not, this was the original plan for a little-remembered but much hyped festering turd (they abandoned almost all this in favor of MMORPG cookie-cutter) called Horizons.

The original Horizons plan was ambitious -- you could fly, true 3D travel ala City of Heroes. You could build things, and even tunnel and change landscape.

There were a number of normal classes, but there was also a full dragon class. The dragon class was intended, at the endgame, to be an even fight for any 3 of the other classes.

The dragon plan was you would go find or burrow out your lair cave, then actually start stocking up a real dragon hoard. The goal was endgame PvP of dragon vs. Players with normal chars trying to raid and steal the hoard.

In a precursor of SW Galaxies and Eve, the dragon had to be unlocked, and alao had progress timers to stop them from advancing too quickly -- a year was discussed -- and by then you'd be forming your lair and dumping your phat loots into it, and the bigger it was, the more power you had but the more player adventurers would start drooling.

They preserved the dragon as a class, but it was wimpified. No lairs, and your "hoard" was an item grinder you dumped your loot into to build up a special dragon power number, again hardly giving severe advantage according to the old plan.

Also, to add insult to injury, it was grossly cartoonic (unlike early screenshots) and dragons were these fat little puppydogs.

The tale of the feature collapse (and takeover) was legendary, easy to Google.

Yeah I recall Horizons, I played a little of it in Beta. Was a pretty piss poor game. The roadway travel on it was very irritating, it made sense in a way, but the roads were narrow and the travel was f-in irritating to keep gaining and losing the speed modifier.

I don't remember all the plans you listed there, but I didn't follow it too closely. I thought the dragons part sounded cool on it, and found it to be mediocre. So perhaps I am just mis-remembering some of the pre-game hype that got me interested in the first place.


I just like the idea of MMOs being more than just social chat rooms with a game slapped on. I think a storied out Minecraft type game meant to be driven by large groups of people to really push the story and game should be where the games will pick up a new interest in the MMO market. Without modifying the world (not trivially like Vanguard and houses in pre-fixed places) you're stuck with what the devs make available for content and how many times you can stand to re-run it. Once players can change the landscape and what not, it could be triggers for lots of other things in-game like NPC assaults, PC assaults, and other unforeseen consequences like unearthing dungeons/traps/new enemies.

With something taking a lot of people and a period of time, their decisions could drive the development process versus what the devs think they want.

I am not sure we have the computing capability to do it, but it doesn't seem like anyone is even looking in that direction.

I'd also like to see tornadoes, volcanoes, etc in games as well. And people having to deal with them with the tech/magic and perhaps combining efforts to control/stop/re-direct these things.

36.
 
Re: Steam Precludes Class Action Lawsuits
Jul 31, 2012, 23:22
36.
Re: Steam Precludes Class Action Lawsuits Jul 31, 2012, 23:22
Jul 31, 2012, 23:22
 
Much like everything else to do with businesses. Once one does it and gets away with it, the rest follow if it looks like it's common and has benefits to them.

This stuff is why EULAs should have some regulations placed on them, hell all agreements should have some regulations placed on them with SEVERE penalties to discourage language that ever borders on breaking those regulations.

The below story should be enough reason as to why forced arbitration in any agreement is bullshit. Because it prevents crimes from being brought to light.

I mean it resulted in a law being passed stopping arbitration clauses in companies who work with the defense department, but it's clearly not in the best interest when an actual crime has taken place. Not just a mistake or glitch, but they are committing a crime.

http://prospect.org/article/how-women-won-kbr-rape-case

I find the idea that someone is having you sign away your legal avenues over video games to be...........eye raising. There's an undertone of "We have, are, or are going to be screwing you soon, sign this please."

Any company being able to do that shouldn't be legal without them adhering to guidelines and restrictions on it set in law.
508 Comments. 26 pages. Viewing page 5.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16    26  ] Older