Krovven wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 15:20:
It would be a port, not designed for consoles now. Just like the old Playstation version.

This is where I think you're wrong. Cross platform development wasn't nearly as prevalent back when Diablo was ported to the PlayStation.

Considering how it's a given now, you can't honestly believe the inevitable porting of D3 to consoles has not impacted their development strategy for it from day one.

Krovven wrote on Apr 14, 2011, 14:28:
Diablo was released on Playstation. Boo-Hoo. People need to get over that most games WILL be cross-platform at some point.

Diablo was ported to PlayStation, not developed with the PlayStation as the primary platform. Big difference.

While you may not mind what console development has done to PC gaming development, others do.

If what he says is true, it's more like Torchlight, intended release on consoles and Titan is to be integrated with Facebook, then I'm losing a lot of faith in Blizzard. I'll obviously wait to see if these things are confirmed, but it wouldn't surprise me to see more of what we love get watered down.

Creston wrote on Apr 13, 2011, 13:02:
I'd like to point out that this issue didn't JUST get reported on bio's forum either. Plenty of people opened tickets with EA over the weekend, and got ignored, as usual. It's EA's vaunted support/quality assurance at work.

But it's great to see industry mouthpieces still trying to pretend like it's perfectly normal to have a 16 month old SINGLE PLAYER GAME break for four days because of outdated and retarded fucking DRM. We just don't understand how hard it is to do all this customer support, guys! Nobody else in the entire world has to support their products like these poor, overworked devs do! It's just not fair! We can't expect them to really pay attention to this stuff.

I guess that on-call support issue I had to deal with at 10.30pm last night in no way compares to a fucking server dying on Friday. Isn't that what you pay a server admin for? To monitor this shit and get it back up, OVER THE WEEKEND if necessary?

This is what amazes me. I've called a game company for support before and most likely never will again. You get generic bullshit answers from some dipshit with an attitude because he's tired of dealing with frustrated customers. Then you have volunteers monitoring forums for games that have made the company millions in revenue just over a year ago. How these fucks are able to get away with such abysmal support is simply amazing. I want to know, just when are there actually going to be repercussions? And not in the form of the occasional Bluenews member boycotting their game.

Verno wrote on Apr 13, 2011, 10:36:

"Normally, we are pretty responsive to activity on the forums, but you may also be aware that our forums are staffed voluntarily"

Oh good, then all is forgiven because you can't be bothered to have a paid employee read your support forums!

You have got to be shitting me. For an indie, this is to be expected, but for a Triple A developer/publisher it's absolutely inexcusable and pathetic.

I think there's some validity to what he's saying though. I recall reading a post from a Tiger Woods dev, explaining that the reason there aren't more trees, people, etc on the golf course is because the current old ass hardware is limiting them. Do I believe this to be entirely true? No. But the PC market certainly has the console market to blame for the current technology ceiling. So if these guys want new tech to build bigger, better games, we should encourage that. Whether we agree with his position or not, new console hardware will raise limitations for game development and we should see less disparity between PC and console tech.

Verno wrote on Apr 12, 2011, 07:08:
It's from the Wolf:ET devs which is why it's generating a lot of buzz. They know how to build well balanced MP shooters and have great mappers on staff.

But didn't these guys also make Quake Wars:ET? Which was considered somewhat of a dud.

Verno wrote on Apr 11, 2011, 18:00:
A game I want being released sooner than expected? I wonder what the temperature is like in hell right now.

Technically you expected it last year, so I'm sure it's still toasty.

I'm stoked for this game too.

In hindsight, yeah the idea of saying something is similar or a clone, is one in the same. I guess what it boils down to for me is, people should just say it will be like any other MMO that's out. To that, I'd say... yeah, no shit.

Like you mentioned, we look for what's different and if that appeals to us we get it. But if you've been a gamer long enough (and most of us have), you know that games innovate upon one another. Sometimes in large jumps, others in small bits. Until we get our hands on it (or read reviews) to understand how ability, skill tree and class mechanics differ from previous mmo titles, then no one really knows. But if you're calling it a clone simply because it's an rpg that has abilities, skill trees and classes, then that's just silly.

This comment was edited on Apr 11, 2011, 15:33.

It's one thing to say it's similar, it's another to say it's a clone. I feel what I listed out refutes the generic WoW clone accusation based on common sense.

As to what you're saying, I could research the features extensively or just get my hands on it to address those finer points. Which are perfectly valid points to bring up. I'd rather just get my hands on it to see what sets it apart for the most part. I'm bored with WoW, ToR looks different enough and has a different enough "story" to pique my interest.

Let's start with the common sense stuff, given that it's a different game, made by a different company, based off of completely different source material.

-Entirely different universe and characters within
-Voice dialog for quests
-Cutscenes, when characters interact
-Newer graphics engine, different texture sets
-Medieval Weapons vs SciFi Weapons
-Different races (no dwarves, elves, gnomes that other high fantasy games share)
-Ships and space combat
-Different classes, trees, abilities

I could go on, but I'm sure someone will draw comparisons (i.e. jawas and gnomes) or some shit.

Slashman wrote on Apr 11, 2011, 13:51:
Serious Sam: Second Encounter is an FPS and so is Metro 2033...yet there are major differences in their approach to gameplay and story-telling(well...none really in Serious Sam...but you get my point).

Naturally you can find differences between games of a similar genre too. But they share more similarities than games do across genres is my point. To call Old Republic a WoW clone is a joke. There are far more differences than similarities, it would be silly to have to list them out to quantify that.

Riker wrote on Apr 11, 2011, 12:36:

Elessar wrote on Apr 11, 2011, 10:57:
Can I have your Old Republic beta key if you're not gonna use it?

BioWare has shown off plenty of the game, so no, I don't think my pre-judgement of the game is unreasonable. It's WoW wearing a space suit.

More generic bullshit. As if WoW didn't derive anything from former MMOs. You can find similarities in almost any game within genres.

Riker wrote on Apr 11, 2011, 10:53:
An MMO taking place after the big threat has been eliminated? Uh, yeah. And if The Old Republic is any indication of how BioWare does MMOs, I'll pass.

Can I have your Old Republic beta key if you're not gonna use it?

If they could pull off expanding their worlds, letting you travel around outside of the bounds of the maps we're used to, then I say hell yes. I've often caught myself staring into the distance on certain worlds, wishing I could explore them more.

Longswd wrote on Apr 9, 2011, 21:32:
I just don't understand why they use console gameplay for demo footage, the aiming is so horribly stilted it's a major turnoff.

My thoughts exactly. Why not show the PC version? These companies have proven in the past they have no shame in false advertising, so let the naive console fans believe they're getting an awesome looking game with fluid, fast movement and let us get a feel for how a shooter should really look/feel.

No. Instead, we get to see a stiff representation of the newest id shooter. Aside from the visuals, it looked repetitive and uninventive to boot. Like an HD Borderlands, probably minus weapon stats and variety.

Silicon Avatar wrote on Apr 8, 2011, 00:44:
I think he sounds bored with it.

I think some of you guys are reading FAR too much into this.

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Apr 7, 2011, 10:15:
This game apparently needs some fine print:

"Note: Works best with Techno."

Watched the trailer and thought the same thing. They showed a little classical, but was surprised they didn't show any rock or something. Game looks interesting though.

Icewind wrote on Apr 6, 2011, 15:42:
I guess charging people to be your beta testers works out.

It only proves that there are a lot of gullible aspies in the world.

At a significant discount from what the final product will be. Plus, it's was quite operational when I bought it in beta, that updates only provide more features adds to the fun. There's nothing gullible about "preordering" a game and being able to play it while it's improved.

Your antagonistic comment is unwarranted imo.

Silicon Avatar wrote on Apr 6, 2011, 15:53:
I don't really know why this guy is famous and I'm pretty sure I don't care.

Dude, tons of movies, some very successful and a highly rated tv show for starters.