User information for [deleted]

Real Name
[deleted]
Nickname
None given.
Email
Concealed by request - Send Mail
Description
Homepage
None given.

Supporter

Signed On
July 19, 2009
Total Posts
251 (Amateur)
User ID
55094
Search For:
Sort Results:
Ascending
Descending
Limit Results:
 
251 Comments. 13 pages. Viewing page 12.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  ] Older
2.
 
Re: Bad Company 2 Limited Edition FAQ
Oct 30, 2009, 16:38
2.
Re: Bad Company 2 Limited Edition FAQ Oct 30, 2009, 16:38
Oct 30, 2009, 16:38
 
COD is primarily strong as a single player game & less of a multi-player game

I would go with the other way around...
41.
 
Re: Leaked MW2 Video Confirmed
Oct 28, 2009, 18:24
41.
Re: Leaked MW2 Video Confirmed Oct 28, 2009, 18:24
Oct 28, 2009, 18:24
 
"No, which is why I didn't say "requiring" the gamer to commit blatant acts of cold-blooded murder. But for the gamer who wants the full experience, and the full story, IW is making them responsible for partaking in, rather than just being told about, the mass-killing of innocents. Regardless, including reprehensible material is not in my view suddenly made better simply by giving the option to skip it.

If IW believed that this doesn't cross the line, then why would they add the skip function? Even they see this as beyond ordinary narrative and storytelling, because it would seem it's the only part they are giving the option to skip."



Make and require could be used interchangeably in the sentence. No one is forcing you to watch it, that is a fact. If you feel like you are missing part of the story even though we already know what the cutscen is about, that is a whole different deal. There have been plenty of games that have had skippable cutscenes do to their violent and graphic nature. It's nothing new.
36.
 
Re: Leaked MW2 Video Confirmed
Oct 28, 2009, 17:10
36.
Re: Leaked MW2 Video Confirmed Oct 28, 2009, 17:10
Oct 28, 2009, 17:10
 
"It's pretty despicable to make the gamer responsible for personally committing blatant acts of cold-blooded murder on civilians.."

Did you miss the fact that they added a skip button? If you don't want to have the burden of killing civilian NPCs on you that is fine, skip it. I could see if they gave no warning to what the skippable scenes were, but obviously we now know and it won't be a problem. Along with the publicity, that is probably part of the reason they leaked it. Otherwise people would start the game and wonder, "A scene that could be offensive? I must check it out!" Now there is no excuse not to skip it if you think the concept is offensive.

This comment was edited on Oct 28, 2009, 17:11.
6.
 
Re: Batman: Arkham Asylum Interview
Oct 19, 2009, 16:48
6.
Re: Batman: Arkham Asylum Interview Oct 19, 2009, 16:48
Oct 19, 2009, 16:48
 
It already is on PC, and I didn't notice anything to make me think it was made for consoles like I do in other games. Overall a great game, with an interesting story line and fun combat. The riddles were a blast, too.
5.
 
Re: Diablo II Patch Delayed Further
Oct 1, 2009, 18:23
5.
Re: Diablo II Patch Delayed Further Oct 1, 2009, 18:23
Oct 1, 2009, 18:23
 
As long as you arn't playing multiplayer it should be fine. I played through the game with the mod in singleplayer and didn't have any problems. The mod really is great though, it makes a huge difference.
14.
 
Re: BioShock 2 in Feb 2010
Sep 18, 2009, 14:27
14.
Re: BioShock 2 in Feb 2010 Sep 18, 2009, 14:27
Sep 18, 2009, 14:27
 
When they first stated Bioshock 2 was going to be a prequel, I was kind of excited. Partly because of the fact that prequels generally take place before the others games. I wanted to see Rature in its prime, not after it has become a piece of garbage.
8.
 
Re: Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood Patch
Sep 11, 2009, 19:50
8.
Re: Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood Patch Sep 11, 2009, 19:50
Sep 11, 2009, 19:50
 
The 90's called... it wants its stereotypes back.
16.
 
Rock Band Network Store to offer free so
Aug 27, 2009, 15:28
16.
Rock Band Network Store to offer free so Aug 27, 2009, 15:28
Aug 27, 2009, 15:28
 
I was really excited until:

1. I realised that the demos were not for true songs, but rather original works composed by amateurs.

2. The songs made cannot be under copyright laws, meaning this is basically an upgraded version of what GH:WT has, which I could care less for. There will be around 20 good submissons, and most of those will be $3 most likely.
13.
 
A Series of Michio Kaku Videos that Will
Aug 25, 2009, 17:19
13.
A Series of Michio Kaku Videos that Will Aug 25, 2009, 17:19
Aug 25, 2009, 17:19
 
The link to A Series of Michio Kaku Videos that Will Blow Your Mind tried to get me to click on an icon mimicking the true windows one. Be careful if you go to that site.
4.
 
Re: Morning Consolidation
Aug 25, 2009, 14:25
4.
Re: Morning Consolidation Aug 25, 2009, 14:25
Aug 25, 2009, 14:25
 
Tom Petty in Rock Band? About time!
4.
 
Re: Diablo III Interviews
Aug 23, 2009, 19:41
4.
Re: Diablo III Interviews Aug 23, 2009, 19:41
Aug 23, 2009, 19:41
 
Getting rid of town portals are a brilliant idea, I don't know what you are talking about. Infact, might as well remove identity too, because those were pointless.
38.
 
Re: WoW Cataclysm Announced
Aug 23, 2009, 01:06
38.
Re: WoW Cataclysm Announced Aug 23, 2009, 01:06
Aug 23, 2009, 01:06
 
Also, assuming you were right about everyone getting the updated old world for free, this is what people will be paying for:

Two New Playable Races: Adventure as the cursed worgen with the Alliance or the resourceful goblins with the Horde.
While neat looking, this really adds nothing to the game. I would much rather have a single new class than 2 new races. It adds nothing to the game asides new faces.

Increased Level Cap: Advance to level 85 and earn new abilities, tap into new talents, and progress through the path system, a new way for players to customize characters.
Can't complain here, levels are levels. But to be fair, they only raised it 5 compared to 10 in the last two expansions. While I understand that levels are harder as you increase, it wasn't a problem in WotLK.

Guild Advancement: Progress as a guild to earn guild levels and guild achievements.
Really? This is just a pat on the back for raid guilds or casual guilds that can't get together raids. Kind of fun for a while, but nothing to get excited about.

New High-Level Content: Explore newly opened parts of the world, including Uldum, Grim Batol, and the great sunken city of Vashj'ir beneath the sea, and enjoy even more high-level raid content than in previous expansions.
All three of those have been in-game since release. They obviously had it planned out to be implemented in the future, so why did they blatantly lie to us about revisiting the old world?


New PvP Zone & Rated Battlegrounds: Take on PvP objectives and daily quests on Tol Barad Island, a new Wintergrasp-like zone, and wage war in all-new rated Battlegrounds.
Great, a copy of Wintergrasp.

Archaeology: Master a new secondary profession to unearth valuable artifacts and earn unique rewards.
Let me guess, it will be like mining except with artifacts sticking out of the ground. I won't call it too early though. It depends if it is gathering-based like it sounds.

Basically, the meat of the expansion is 5 levels, a new proffesion, and rated battlegrounds.

I'm not mad at Blizzard, because I'm glad they are revisiting the old world as it was my favorite part. But this expansion just seems weak, and it is strange they would go back on such a strong statement they made. It just seems like a jump-the-shark type deal.

I suppose we should see what it turns out like though, it may be cool, just not cool enough to bring me back to the game.

This comment was edited on Aug 23, 2009, 01:09.
37.
 
Re: WoW Cataclysm Announced
Aug 23, 2009, 00:54
37.
Re: WoW Cataclysm Announced Aug 23, 2009, 00:54
Aug 23, 2009, 00:54
 
Don't call me out when you don't even understand what I was saying. Back before The Burning Crusade(not after like I mis-stated above), players were asking for a redone Old World with updated graphics and the ability to use flying mounts. I can't remember if it was Eyonix or Tigole, but one of them stated that they would never redo the old world because it would require too many resources. All of a sudden, they are willing to use the resources to redo it? Why? It's not like it has a ton of benefits anyway, which was why no one made a big deal about it when they stated they wouldn't revisit it. Aside from quicker travel to Uldar, etc., it really is a waste. I'd like to know what made them change their minds, are they running dry on new ideas or what?

This comment was edited on Aug 23, 2009, 01:10.
5.
 
Re: a crusade only of the brave
Aug 22, 2009, 17:40
5.
Re: a crusade only of the brave Aug 22, 2009, 17:40
Aug 22, 2009, 17:40
 
Is this Diablo III or Streetfighter?
1.
 
GH5 DLC not compatible with WT
Aug 22, 2009, 14:43
1.
GH5 DLC not compatible with WT Aug 22, 2009, 14:43
Aug 22, 2009, 14:43
 
Pretty douchey move by Activision. Sure, there were a few advancements, but how would that stop DLC compatibility?
25.
 
Re: WoW Cataclysm Announced
Aug 21, 2009, 18:23
25.
Re: WoW Cataclysm Announced Aug 21, 2009, 18:23
Aug 21, 2009, 18:23
 
It's pretty weak that Blizzard stated they would never redo the old world because it would require too many resources. Now they will, but only if we pay money. So many people asked for this in a patch post BC. Better late than never I suppose.

Two questions though:

1. Tauren rogue? Or is that still off limits.

2. How do they explain goblin-neutral cities now?

Everything else looks cool, I'm glad they are redoing the 1-60 because post BC I hated WoW.
30.
 
Re: Several Years Until All of StarCraft II is Completed
Aug 20, 2009, 00:13
30.
Re: Several Years Until All of StarCraft II is Completed Aug 20, 2009, 00:13
Aug 20, 2009, 00:13
 
I completely forgot about Warcraft itself, as I completely skipped the series. Starcraft came out a couple of years after Warcraft so I just played the most recent game. Again going with what I was point out, Warcraft II took just over a year to create, while WIII took all the way untill 2002, 7 years later. Blizzard is getting slower and slower with seemingly no punishment. The same thing goes for Valve. It took them nearly a decade to turn the TF mod into an all out game, but even then, it was a brand new game(though not an original idea). It was also an online FPS. Apples to oranges. Creating content for expansions of RTS and RPG games is much easier than starting a new FPS from scratch.

As for the first installment of Starcraft II being apparently just as long, the article I read didn't know what it was talking about because the game was still early in development at the time. So I do infact, know a little bit of what I'm talking about. Perhaps I was too trusting of "insider" info from the Blizzcon.

By the way, I'm in no way trying to say I could do better than Blizzard, but I would like to know why it has takent hem so long. Did they move ALL of their resources to WoW? Did they think about giving up on Diablo? Remember that for a while no one thought it would come out.
12.
 
Re: Several Years Until All of StarCraft II is Completed
Aug 18, 2009, 23:50
12.
Re: Several Years Until All of StarCraft II is Completed Aug 18, 2009, 23:50
Aug 18, 2009, 23:50
 
A lot of comments in this thread are idiotic. First of all, to clear things up, this article is about STARCRAFT TWO. Stop talking about the first one.

It shouldn't have taken Blizzard this long to create Starcraft II or Diablo III. I understand they moved a lot of their resources to World of Warcraft but that game is about to collapse anyway. The amount of tweaking they are still doing 5 years after release is unneccesary and is only being done to keep customers on the hook.

Wasn't it said in the article that each "Game" was much shorter than Starcraft I itself? In which case, using the Valve anology would go more like this; Valve breaks Hl2 into three games excluding the episodes and releases them one by one.

Blizzard completely dropped the ball in both the Starcraft and Diablo franchises, and they're trying to make it up now. Do you know how easy it could have been to update the graphics and add a class or two to diablo or a few missions to starcraft? Blizzard should have been dishing out expansion packs like candy.

I would have much prefered streaming content via expansions than near-decade long breaks between releases.


Furthermore, Diablo II got it's first expansion pack in just over a year. World of Warcraft is averaging an expansion pack every two and a half years. Going by those numbers, starcraft II should not have taken this long.

This comment was edited on Aug 18, 2009, 23:54.
17.
 
Re: StarCraft II Details - No Co-op Camp
Aug 17, 2009, 12:20
17.
Re: StarCraft II Details - No Co-op Camp Aug 17, 2009, 12:20
Aug 17, 2009, 12:20
 
As long as D3 has LAN, I really don't care.
18.
 
Re: Into the Black
Aug 13, 2009, 00:56
18.
Re: Into the Black Aug 13, 2009, 00:56
Aug 13, 2009, 00:56
 
The article had a legitimate point until I saw the little downloadable "posters". In case they didn't notice, fighting fire with fire isn't going to help the situation, especially when directed at jocks, cheerleaders, and gamers.


Also, I really would not care at all if someone said "that is straight!"
251 Comments. 13 pages. Viewing page 12.
Newer [  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  ] Older