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:
United Kingdom 06/02

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Anonymous User

Real Name Anonymous User   
Search for:
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
Nickname DrEvil
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Homepage None given.
Signed On May 31, 2000, 05:27
Total Comments 504 (Apprentice)
User ID 5120
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >

News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs
10. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Nov 28, 2012, 15:36 DrEvil
Cutter wrote on Nov 27, 2012, 15:35:
Because in these cases these people have gone so far as to hire lawyers to send notices to Google about the problem and nothing gets done. Imagine everytime someone google your name - potential employer maybe - and it came up with a bunch of links about you being a gangster or child rapist or the like. What if these links are in countries where you have no legal recourse or the cost of getting them removed is too high? No, Google has a responsibility here. Everyone is accountable, there is no 'I was just following orders' bullshit.

I understand the sentiment, but this is an impossible task. The only way to deal with this is to after the source of the libel -- not Google.

Google is providing a generic search engine, if people post garbage, and search for something related, the garbage will come out.

All someone has to do after their link is excluded from Google's search index is rename it and poof, they're back again.

So what's the point of making Google exclude specific URLs (out of billions) from their search results? None.

Google is not at fault here; it's impractical to expect them to police the stupidity of others or waste their time trying to censor the world.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Game Reviews
11. Re: Game Reviews Nov 15, 2012, 13:58 DrEvil
Axis wrote on Nov 15, 2012, 12:44:
Metacritic is 100% correct, no blame to be had for enforcing their well known policy. Its up to the publishers to do their job.

And with the state of many piss-poor idiotic nub reviewers, this is the smart thing to do on MC's part.

I'm sorry, but no. It's a common, expected practice to accept retractions for articles. What should have happened is that GameSpot would be excluded from the score entirely for that game. That solves the problem of reviewers being pressured to revise scores and is more fair to the involved third party.

As it is, I was already questioning which critics metacritic was choosing to include in scores. Some of the sites they're using have little to no integrity.

And As someone else pointed out, Metacritic was already caught applying double standards in this area when they chose to ignore a review from destructoid on a game because destructoid gave it a 10/10.

They can't have it both ways.

I personally don't own or plan to buy NS2 and have never played it, but after this fiasco, I will no longer rely at all on metacritic score. I've lost all confidence in them.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Spud's Quest Kickstarter
5. Re: Spud's Quest Kickstarter Nov 2, 2012, 21:04 DrEvil
I'll admit it's a mildly cute retro game, but something strikes me as odd about the project and I just can't name what it is. It's almost like I've seen this game before.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Out of the Blue
69. Re: Out of the Blue Oct 30, 2012, 16:30 DrEvil
Stay safe Blue (and your family)! That's all that matters to us.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Saturday Tech Bits
5. Re: Saturday Tech Bits Oct 7, 2012, 02:26 DrEvil
Fibrocyte wrote on Oct 6, 2012, 18:20:
Gojo wrote on Oct 6, 2012, 15:30:
deqer wrote on Oct 6, 2012, 14:01:

I wonder if people knew about iPhones when buying galaxy phones.

I think people knew of iphones, but avoided them. ...
Just a theory.

Pretty much a fact. Consumers savvy enough to choose the Galaxy S III almost certainly know all about the iPhone (who doesn't?) I would wager the opposite is true however, that not all iPhone consumers know much about Android phones. Of course that's just my jaded opinion.

I agree and personally think that the S3 is an excellent device. I'm pretty sure that with a modded ROM it is the best phone available.

If it's screen didn't have that awful Pentile blue tinge, I might agree with you. The HTC One X has the better screen; so does an iPhone 4S+.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Loot Drop's Tom Hall/Brenda Brathwaite Kickstarter
38. Re: Loot Drop's Tom Hall/Brenda Brathwaite Kickstarter Oct 4, 2012, 01:28 DrEvil
Bob wrote on Oct 3, 2012, 16:42:
nin wrote on Oct 3, 2012, 10:13:
What ever happened to the Coles KS? Did I miss it?

From the guys from andromeda website: "The Coles are planning to start the School for Heroes Kickstarter project at the end of October, with an expected fundraising goal of $300-400k."

Holy crap! I'm in. Sold. I'd back the Coles over Romero any day!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Borderlands 3 Mentioned
34. Re: Borderlands 3 Mentioned Oct 1, 2012, 15:43 DrEvil
Verno wrote on Oct 1, 2012, 10:19:
My ideas for improvement:

- 87,000 unique and interesting guns instead of 87 bazillion combinations of the same 30 guns.

- Loot drops on the ground instead of flying out everywhere, including under the ground textures.

- Instanced loot OR tweaked drop rates. There is not enough good loot in MP games to go around if you have some bad luck. After Diablo 3 this should not be a thing anymore.

- 4 brand new classes instead of 3 remixes and 1 new one (maybe 2 when Mecromancer comes out)

- Divorce from the old storyline/characters completely, fresh start. I like BL2 but it really feels like BL 1.5 in many ways.

- Multiple class abilities, one per tree at least with sub abilities therein. Some argue this is already in the game but I don't buy it.

How about "no infinite respawn" so I can actually feel like my actions are somewhat meaningful? Or at the least option for it, geez.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc.
3. Re: etc. Sep 30, 2012, 19:59 DrEvil
ASeven wrote on Sep 30, 2012, 14:43:
Molyneux: Curiosity prize is not money or Half-Life 3. But will "change your life forever." I'm guessing amputationů

How about some surprise castration instead?

Perhaps the Spanish Inquisition? Nobody expects that...
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Diablo III 1.0.5 Notes; PTR Coming
16. Re: Diablo III 1.0.5 Notes; PTR Coming Sep 21, 2012, 14:15 DrEvil
Verno wrote on Sep 21, 2012, 11:08:
nin wrote on Sep 21, 2012, 10:28:
I honestly can't think of anything that would make me want to play D3 again, especially now that Torchlight 2 has launched.

Pretty much, big meh. TL2 is everything that Diablo 3 failed to be. The story is totally forgettable but I'd rather have a forgettable story than the linear dreck that we were force fed in Diablo 3.

Of course D3's portrayal of one its main characters and a pivotal event involving them was the lamest thing I've seen. (Spoilers follow:)

Seriously, was anyone else as hacked off as I was at how pathetic the way Deckard Cain dies is? A main character only gets a pathetic in-game cutscene death from what I've seen on youtube and heard from others. They effectively ended the Diablo franchise when they killed Cain -- and in such a pathetic way.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Steamships Ahoy - FTL: Faster Than Light
10. Re: Steamships Ahoy - FTL: Faster Than Light Sep 14, 2012, 21:57 DrEvil
dj LiTh wrote on Sep 14, 2012, 21:20:
ASeven wrote on Sep 14, 2012, 20:55:
Julio wrote on Sep 14, 2012, 20:54:
FTL is also on GOG. I'd rather support GOG (drm free) than Steamware.

Then you should buy directly from the devs which gives the DRM-free file plus a Steam key and all the money goes to the devs.

I dont see how all the money could goto the devs since they also provide a steam key. Although i did buy mine from the devs for the added options.

My understanding is that Valve allows devs to generate and hand out free steam keys for their games without charging them for it. But since Steam's terms are confidential, I have no way to verify that.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Steamships Ahoy - Tryst
2. Re: Steamships Ahoy - Tryst Sep 14, 2012, 21:53 DrEvil
Help, I'm trapped in a Starcraft/Warcraft RTS clone and I can't get out!  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Planetary Annihilation Funded
3. Re: Planetary Annihilation Funded Sep 14, 2012, 21:52 DrEvil
I pledged originally, but then cancelled. There's no single-player campaign planned -- just AI skirmish.

If they ship with one eventually, then I'll buy it.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > 38 Studios Assets & IP To Be Sold
4. Re: 38 Studios Assets & IP To Be Sold Aug 23, 2012, 21:25 DrEvil
PHJF wrote on Aug 23, 2012, 21:13:
Nobody is going to give one cent for this worthless IP, by the way.

Actually, the IP behind the world itself is worth something. R.A. Salvatore and others spent a great deal of time creating an entire world and characters just for the game. The game itself barely scratched the surface of what was written and created for it.

It's really sort of heartbreaking to see this happen; I only hope Salvatore can either get the rights to his characters back or a publisher that's friendly to him picks them up so he can continue to write for it.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Free WOOT DLC for Magicka Released
4. Re: Free WOOT DLC for Magicka Released Aug 9, 2012, 16:04 DrEvil
JohnBirshire wrote on Aug 9, 2012, 15:57:
Is this worth playing? The reviews I saw were in the "D" and "F" range, however it seems to have a cult following.

It's actually fairly fun, but only as a co-op game IMO, which it excels at. I was bored to tears when I play alone.

Wait until the next mega-steam sale on it and then pick it up. It doesn't cost much, but there is quite a lot of DLC available for it.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
19. Re: Morning Metaverse Aug 7, 2012, 14:22 DrEvil
Matshock wrote on Aug 7, 2012, 14:09:
Obama had two years to grant blanket amnesty and he didn't. He could have sorted the whole thing in your favor in fifteen minutes and he didn't. And you're still waiting at his feet for him to grant you freedom.

First of all, I'm not waiting for amnesty. I was born here, and my ancestors were both native american indians and caucasian immigrants. Second, amnesty would be beyond the president's executive powers since immediately after granting amnesty, it would be invalid again until congress changes immigration law.

His position in fact is that your immigrant family members are still likely illegal- he can come for you whenever he wants to but he is graciously choosing not to, for now.

Thanks for making ASSumptions.

We racist Americans only want two things regarding Mexico: get control of the boarder and make immigrants suffer all the same taxes and regulations that we do while they are here. Mass exportation is a bogey man story told by Democrats to keep you in line.

If you think immigrants don't suffer, you're dead wrong. To keep the government from finding out, the vast majority of businesses still withhold taxes from the paychecks of "undocumented" immigrants and treat them exactly as they would a normal employee in terms of taxes.

So it's even worse than you'd like to believe; the current situation makes immigrants permanent second-class citizens. They grow up here, live here, pay taxes here, but don't get citizenship and so don't have the right to vote to determine how their taxes are spent. They can't legally get driver's licenses in most states, and they can't get many forms of insurance we take for granted.

Even more tellingly, I bet you're not aware that a large portion of those undocumented immigrants actually file their federal taxes at the end of the year using a federal tax ID that was assigned to them at one point in the past. That's right; they have no valid social security card, but still end up paying and filing federal and state taxes.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
12. Re: Morning Metaverse Aug 7, 2012, 13:58 DrEvil
Matshock wrote on Aug 7, 2012, 13:48:
Everyone likes money. They have less under Obama- it's simple arithmetic. Not enough people yet value ideology over prosperity, thankfully.

Actually, I have more money under Obama; and I believe will get even more if his administration is able to get certain social and immigration policies enacted as that will favorably impact my friends and family.

Do I like everything he's done? Hell no. But Romney is not the answer.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
10. Re: Morning Metaverse Aug 7, 2012, 13:39 DrEvil
Matshock wrote on Aug 7, 2012, 12:57:
I don't want national health care. I don't even care if you understand why- the evidence against such a thing being beneficial is so overwhelming that only a blind ideologue could ignore it.

Really? Care to point at some of that evidence from a neutral third-party? Why is the USA the only major, developed economy country that doesn't have it? Some of the greatest minds in history (such as Stephen Hawking) are only alive today because of national healthcare programs in their respective countries.

Healthcare should be provided for every member of a society; a "rising tide lifts all boats" as they say. Any economist will tell you that until you take care of the basic needs of a people in a society, they won't have disposable income to inject into the economy.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Metaverse
9. Re: Morning Metaverse Aug 7, 2012, 13:32 DrEvil
Matshock wrote on Aug 7, 2012, 12:34:
You're 3+ years behind the times and that's why Obama will lose.

You have some pretty interesting claims in your post, and some statistics I'm pretty sure were pulled out of some random nether region.

You seem to imply that Romney is superior to Obama, but you completely gloss over the fact that despite Obama's failures, Romney would be a disaster from a religious freedom and personal freedom perspective.

I don't have much else to say about the rest of your post except that my personal belief is that you are so very wrong. I can't fathom how Romney could win at this point, unless Americans have another collective lapse of consciousness and zombie-vote for Romney like they did for Bush.

You also appear to completely ignore the large segment of non-Caucasian voters who I sincerely doubt would vote for Romney.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Oculus Rift Kickstarter
40. Re: Oculus Rift Kickstarter Aug 2, 2012, 20:51 DrEvil
Quboid wrote on Aug 2, 2012, 11:15:
640x800 on a 110 degree FOV screen? That is not a high resolution display.

1) you don't need super high resolution that close to the eyes, it would be nice, but this is pleasant enough by all accounts

2) the latency is what matters; almost every other headset available has poor latency by comparison
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Sanctum OS X Plans
12. Re: Sanctum OS X Plans Jul 29, 2012, 16:08 DrEvil
Kitkoan wrote on Jul 29, 2012, 02:57:
DrEvil wrote on Jul 29, 2012, 01:52:
I'd like to see what claims you have to backup "OSX is bloated"; I also fail to see how the "bloat" of an OS in the "traditional sense" would even matter here. As far as "Apple's lackluster hardware", which hardware are you talking about? Certainly not the new MacBook Pro Retina with a GeForce GT650M. Their hardware, in general, is certainly no worse than the mainstream PC market in terms of performance or ability.

As I said, look up other games that are both coded for Windows and OSX. You'll notice that the OSX version needs a more powerful GPU due to OSX's excesses usage of OpenCL for all the "pretty" effects. And your comparing a $3000 laptop to what kind of "mainstream PC market"? Most people aren't paying $3K, so please use a more serious example.

Sorry, but I disagree, again. For example, my (fairly old now) MacBook Pro from 2009 has an nVidia GeForce 9600 GT; yet I'm still able to play things at acceptable framerates such as StarCraft 2, Civilization V, etc.

Does it run as smoothly as my PC w/ a GTX 580? Heck no. But it's playable, and it works well enough.

Could the performance be better? Sure. But that's not what I was arguing about.

I will readily agree that on Windows, most games can run faster. But that wasn't my point. My point was that it's a commercially viable platform.

I'm uncertain why you believe the OS' use of OpenCL/OpenGL is the primary cause of issues here.

Most of the performance issues in OS X can be traced back to the kernel or to Apple's current OpenGL stack. But these are things that continue to get better, and I might add are not preventing the commercial success of games on the platform.

The performance of the system is good enough, although I wish it was better in some areas.

So hold on, first you tell me you don't know why I think OpenGL could be a primary cause here, then you go on to tell me you know that OpenGL has problems which would be a primary cause since it is the API used from graphical games. If it's having issues doing the main part of the program/game then I would say that is one of the primary causes. And back to OpenCL doing too many OSX extras like the animation, etc...

No, you implied that OpenGL was somehow broken or busted on the OS X platform; it's not. Apple has an OpenGL 3.2 implementation that's very reliable, spec-compliant, etc. I never claimed it was the fastest implementation though. I merely claimed it was a good one, in the sense that it works as expected.

You continue to harp about OpenCL being the cause of woe, but I've seen no evidence to support that, either from you, or in my own development work, or from the comments of other developers. This is the the first time I've seen anyone claim that OpenCL is the source of performance issues on OS X for games, etc.

Nowhere did any of us suggest that Apple makes "a good gaming rig"; I agree that they don't. What I am willing to claim though is that their hardware is just as suitable as most mainstream PCs for gaming, and their laptops are certainly just as qualified as the majority of the ones on the market. (Exceptions being "portable workstations" like the ones Alienware/Dell sells.)

Define "their hardware" and now you want to compare I'm guessing that $3000 laptop but don't want to compare it to a $2000-$3000 PC laptop?

You're guessing wrong. You could take any of the desktop or laptop systems Apple currently sells with discrete graphics hardware and they would provide a commercially viable system for mainstream gaming for developers to sell to.

Until Apple actually makes it clear that their intent is to lock their platform down, it's silly to assign to classify their actions here as malignant. Microsoft is making the same moves with Windows 8. Believe it or not, the same moves have also been considered (as far as signed application execution) in the UNIX market space for the last few years now as well with the advent of TPM and "trusted boot" technologies.

Turning it on by default pretty much did show they are slowly moving towards closing OSX. Depending on the backlash will show if they finally do, but my money is that they will. But it's not set in stone nor did I claim it was.

Again, until Apple actually moves in a direction that prohibits open development, I'm not going to run around thinking the sky is falling.

Me: Gatekeeper is now on by default and most basic users won't turn it off because you have to go to the Security settings and turn things off (people will think warning signs about turning any system settings off, more so with a security setting clearly labelled Security).

But by default, there's a documented shortcut key for allowing you to open the app regardless of the security setting. Which I believe can be reached through the '?' read more link on the Gatekeeper popup. I applaud Apple's move here as too many people will just run any random thing they download and instantly click through dialogs. It's almost a given that if you require people to actually read something, they won't, and so most individuals won't bypass gatekeeper.

Because everyone reads every system warning and doesn't just click the box to remove the warning/note. Might I introduce you to the average user? Tip, they don't read things like that. Which means that for basic users it kinda will and they are using this as a judge to move to the next step of locking it down.

Did you read what I wrote? I just pointed out that the default behaviour was desirable, and that most users won't read the text, so won't see how to bypass gatekeeper.

The dialog for gatekeeper doesn't offer any options to disable it; the user has to manually nagivate to system preferences and change the setting in the security panel. Or they have to actually read the text and discover the key shortcut for bypassing it.

Yes, I agree the sandbox model needs more permissive models for certain classes of applications. But on the other hand, Apple's trying to do something no one in the desktop industry has done before, so I think it's going to be a learning process for everyone involved. Apple has already expanded the capabilities of the sandbox model from what they provided originally based on developer feedback.

Based on developer feedback? Thats why they are having such a backlash? Over things that developer feedback agreed with?

Apple did make changes based on developer feedback; did I claim they made *all* the changes developers wanted? No. I simply indicated that they already expanded capabilities based on feedback. That doesn't mean they just did whatever they were asked. As I said before, Apple is trying something no one in the major desktop market has done before; it's going to be a learning experience for all parties.

Me: And what API's are good for making games on OSX? From what I've heard, OpenGL support is pretty bad on OSX and DirectX doesn't work at all. The two main API's used for games don't have much support that I'm aware of. This really hinders development on OSX as you'll need to use Cocoa I think?

First of all, as of OS X 10.7, the OpenGL support is very good. Apple has a very solid implementation of OpenGL 3.2. Yes, I wish they supported greater than 3.2, but they have a holistic approach to what they support on the platform that tends to reflect their minimum supported hardware profile. My guess is that the next release of OS X will provide support for a newer version of OpenGL as OS X Mountain Lion was the first version to officially drop support for all pre-OpenGL 3.3 hardware.

You are aware OpenGL is version 4.1, and many Apple machines physically can support it but Apple isn't bothing to? This is hurting them, old outdated support, and 4.1 was released in Augest last year, so almost a year later they still are showing no interest. They are only just supporting 3.2 with the newer version of OSX, which is from Augest 2009. Explain how this is really good support of OpenGL?

You are aware that Apple has chosen to base their API support based on the range of supported systems instead of based on the hardware in each individual system?

Now consider that development cycles for supported products typically span years. Apple completely reworked their entire OpenGL stack and provided full OpenGL 3.2 support only two years after it was released.

Then consider that there were three versions of OpenGL released in 2010, and one version in 2011. Then remember that Apple is on the OpenGL review board and actively contributes to it. They know more about the roadmap then we do, and I can't blame them for wanting to take a more holistic approach to its implementation rather than just blindly updating as fast as possible.

Finally, consider that Intel's integrated graphics chipsets didn't actually support versions of OpenGL greater than 3.0 until the HD 3000/4000 series. And even then, those only officially support OpenGL 3.3 currently {1}. Apple was only able to support up to OpenGL 3.2 on Intel hardware because they have their own OpenGL stack and their partnership with Intel.

However, Intel is promising they'll deliver OpenGL 4.x support by the end of this year or beginning of next. With that in mind, I expect Apple's next OS update or the one after to support OpenGL 4.x.

As for them not supporting DirectX; WTF? That's a microsoft-only API that's patented, copyrighted, etc. No large corporate entity is going to provide support for that. Most of the mobile and console device space (excluding the Xbox) is OpenGL ES (iPhone, Android, Blackberry, etc.), or OpenGL-based (PS3).

This is why I mentioned OpenGL, since pretty much every game runs a on either DirectX (Windows only) or OpenGL, and as both you and I have shown, Apple isn't really supporting it since they are only just using a 3 year old version of it thats horribly out of date.

DirectX 11 is also three years old; so I'll assume your real point is that OpenGL 3.2 isn't as capable as OpenGL 4. I would argue that's a failure of the old OpenGL ARB and the new Khronos group is fixing that.

OpenGL 3.2 is more than capable enough to produce commercially-viable titles given that most "PC" games these days are written for DirectX 9 capable hardware anyway thanks to most of them just being so-called "console ports".

For example, did you know that Torchlight was written using the OpenGL 2.1 feature set? How about the fact that every game delivered on OS X before OS X Lion was using OpenGL 2.1?

Furthermore, take into account the context of the discussion here. My original response was to someone implying that Linux was somehow the better development platform here. I would point out that if your'e using Intel graphics, or any other 3D graphics hardware that relies on Mesa3D, you're limited to *less* than OpenGL 3.0 support right now in most cases. Only if you used the closed-binary drivers from AMD or nVidia do you get better than that. So again, developers would be stuck writing their games for an OpenGL implementation even older than what Apple provides.

As such, I stand by my implication that OS X is currently a better development platform than Linux. Since you can at least be guaranteed a minimum OpenGL 3.2 support implementation as it's now reasonable to require OS X Lion or greater.

Me: As for the Humble Indie Bundles, OSX users tend to buy a few more copies but not enough to compensate the average price between it and Linux so it doesn't not have a greater revenue collected.

Uh, wrong. If you actually go look at the last humble bundle graph for total revenues, you'd see that the Mac users contributed more revenue in *total* than Linux users. Almost double. While the Windows users of course contribute several times the Mac+Linux users combined.

Go back, look at it again. I did, thats how I know. I didn't write that until I checked to see.
Humble Bundle 2 was a tie. Frozen Byte Bundle Linux out did OSX by about a decent amount. Humble Bundle 3, Linux just out did OSX. Frozen Synapse was a tie. Voxitron OSX just out did Linux by a little. Introversion Bundle Linux out did OSX by a little. Humble Bundle 4 OSX sold a bit more the Linux. Android Bundle Linux did more then double OSX. Mojam OSX just out sold Linux. Android 2 again Linux more then double. Botanicula OSX did about double Linux. Humble Bundle 5 OSX out sold Linux by about 2/3. Not touching the Music Bundle since it is game free. And Linux always pays more. This means Linux out does OSX on average. I own all the Bundles but the first one so I can check.

PS, I was too tired to bother with better quote tag but it is still understandable

So I'll attribute my original erroneous conclusion about "double" on average to be wrong. As for Linux "out does OS X on average" though; that's also wrong. And here's the data to prove my point:

Currently, total Mac payments is ~$300K greater than total Linux payments. And if you look at the last Humble game bundle (The Humble Indie Bundle V), total Mac payments were almost ~$400K greater (or almost double) than the Linux payments.

You can also see from the graphs that on average there are more Mac purchases than Linux purchases. The only category in which Linux purchases really "win" is average platform purchase price. Linux users get far less games than most other platforms, so are willing to pay more money for these bundles.

Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
504 Comments. 26 pages. Viewing page 5.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ] Older >

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


Blue's News logo