eRe4s3r wrote on May 26, 2018, 00:05:
Hopefully this means Megatextures are dead, one of the dumbest engine dead ends Carmack has ever driven through a village.

eRe4s3r wrote on Feb 26, 2018, 13:53:
Again proving that Source engine is nearly damn near unworkable for unskilled indy developers. The engine and workflow are such a mess that it's easier to bring it already done stuff from other games than make your own (levels, in particular) BSP map building should NOT be a thing in 2018

Beamer wrote on Feb 23, 2018, 07:50:

Razumen wrote on Feb 23, 2018, 01:32:

Beamer wrote on Feb 22, 2018, 16:45:
What he's saying makes sense. The change in aspect ratio means you can't simply slap new graphics into it. You need to completely, fundamentally rebuild how most of the systems operate, to the point that you're essentially building an entirely different game from the ground up.

It'd be a Diablo 2 clone as much as a Diablo 2 remaster.

Er, no, you can just see more of the world, I don't see how that requires them to fundamentally rebuild any game system. It's just a lame excuse overall.

Did you read the article? Pretty much all the calculations around the random generation and the enemies are done just off the screen, and around where the screen is showing. It's not about what you see, it's about what you don't see.

And this isn't an excuse. Brevik isn't at Blizzard, so he has absolutely no say over whether this gets remade or not. It would be done without his participation, or even knowledge. This is just like Spielberg saying that he feels it would be hard to remake Jaws, because more goes into it than what you see on the screen. It's one guy, who was there, giving his opinion on some technical limitations that they used as advantages, but now that they're no longer in place more thought needs to be given than would be to most remasters.

Beamer wrote on Feb 22, 2018, 16:45:
What he's saying makes sense. The change in aspect ratio means you can't simply slap new graphics into it. You need to completely, fundamentally rebuild how most of the systems operate, to the point that you're essentially building an entirely different game from the ground up.

It'd be a Diablo 2 clone as much as a Diablo 2 remaster.

Beamer wrote on Feb 1, 2018, 17:56:

Razumen wrote on Jan 31, 2018, 23:20:

There's nothing wrong with people ASKING nicely for changes like this, and there's nothing wrong with developers choosing not to. However, such a civil outcome is not usually the case. What usually happens is that the requester blows up in indignation that they're not being catered to and then begin a campaign to try to force the addition through shaming and other methods.

And that's how it starts, with people nicely asking for changes. 100 people request it, 99 nicely, but somehow Brianna Wu gets involved. Nearly everyone ignores the requests, except for the dev saying "hmm, I never thought about that, it's good to know people want this." Everyone seems ok, except for 500 people, who send tweets to all the people requesting it telling them they're stupid. 1000 people see those tweets and respond. Someone sees a response and posts it on KotakuInAction. 50,000 people post in the thread making racist jokes and calling those people snowflakes and saying race doesn't matter and there's too much diversity being shoved down throats and it's ok if every single video game is a white guy because white people are awesome. 20,000 other people call those people racist.

You come in at that last point and ignore all the good discussion and focus on the escalation and say that devs ignore the good and focus on the bad and blah blah blah.

Beamer wrote on Jan 31, 2018, 12:13:

Razumen wrote on Jan 31, 2018, 09:32:

Beamer wrote on Jan 31, 2018, 08:05:

Razumen wrote on Jan 31, 2018, 00:15:

Beamer wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 14:42:

FloorPie wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 14:27:

Beamer wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 14:03:

Icewind wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 13:59:
Every indie game nowadays has to be about sexual identity.

I miss when indie games were just about shooting monsters and walking through dungeons.

If you play games to learn about the world around you, then you need to get out more. You can learn about LGBTQ issues anywhere in the real world, you don't need a game. I think these folks are all shut-ins that need a game to tell them about life.

Me? I play games to get away from all the life i'm over-exposed to on a daily basis.

Or maybe the games you want are still out there, only now there's choice for more people, and more people see themselves represented in their game options than before.

I don't get why some people expect every single game to be tailored to their desires.

Yet, some groups are forcing everyone else to tailor their entertainment to satisfy that group's personal desires. If you don't then you're a horrible horrible person. See the Kingdom Come: Delieverance dramas for example. "You need Moors in your 1400s Bohemian game you bigot!"

This game looks gay in all the meanings of that word. I'd not really care if we didn't have people demanding transgender were-dragonkin romances in every silly bioware type (nerd love simulator) game. Heh, I almost yearn for the day when the big scandal was romancing Jahiera in Baldurs Gate just after her husband dies.

Is this true and reality, or do you ignore reasonable requests and pay attention to reactions to reactions to reactions?

Case in point: a game has no black people. Someone says "I'd like this more if there were black people." Sounds reasonable, no? Someone else says that, historically, there were few. Someone else responds that it shouldn't matter, as the game ignores other aspects of history and ultimately inclusiveness can be more worthwhile than arbitrary historical accuracy. Someone else says that person is dumb. Someone else says white people rule. It devolves to both sides accusing the other of bigotry.

Should you focus on that devolution, or the job initial feature request? For Kingdom Come, the game wasn't called racist, but the lengthy screeds the dev wrote were. See how that works? The reaction matters. The reasoning they offer.

Like, your endless buzzwords of what pisses you off makes me wonder about your actual feelings are towards lgbtqs.

It's not a reasonable request, they're demanding that their views are more important than the developers, and features just can't be added in willy nilly-they take time and money. In the end, a "reasonable request" just isn't worth it solely for the buzzword of "diversity".

Ok. Next time you complain about any design decision, be it loot crates or invisible walls, I'll say you aren't being reasonable and that you're demanding your views on what makes a game appealing are more important than the devs.

Also, be sure to call out Icewind for opening this line of reasoning by saying his views were more important than Your Royal Gayness dev's, for him complaining about shoehorning or whatever.

False equivalency bro. Those are things that actually affect how objectively good a game is. The sexual orientation or race of a character in a game usually has no bearing whatsoever on the gameplay.

Loot crates are objectively bad?
You can find people who like them.

And I'm sorry that you don't understand how representation works and why it makes a difference. I'm sorry if having a few games that feature a few characters not exactly like you is so offensive to you that it makes you dislike the games.

Beamer wrote on Jan 31, 2018, 08:05:

Razumen wrote on Jan 31, 2018, 00:15:

Beamer wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 14:42:

FloorPie wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 14:27:

Beamer wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 14:03:

Icewind wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 13:59:
Every indie game nowadays has to be about sexual identity.

I miss when indie games were just about shooting monsters and walking through dungeons.

If you play games to learn about the world around you, then you need to get out more. You can learn about LGBTQ issues anywhere in the real world, you don't need a game. I think these folks are all shut-ins that need a game to tell them about life.

Me? I play games to get away from all the life i'm over-exposed to on a daily basis.

Or maybe the games you want are still out there, only now there's choice for more people, and more people see themselves represented in their game options than before.

I don't get why some people expect every single game to be tailored to their desires.

Yet, some groups are forcing everyone else to tailor their entertainment to satisfy that group's personal desires. If you don't then you're a horrible horrible person. See the Kingdom Come: Delieverance dramas for example. "You need Moors in your 1400s Bohemian game you bigot!"

This game looks gay in all the meanings of that word. I'd not really care if we didn't have people demanding transgender were-dragonkin romances in every silly bioware type (nerd love simulator) game. Heh, I almost yearn for the day when the big scandal was romancing Jahiera in Baldurs Gate just after her husband dies.

Is this true and reality, or do you ignore reasonable requests and pay attention to reactions to reactions to reactions?

Case in point: a game has no black people. Someone says "I'd like this more if there were black people." Sounds reasonable, no? Someone else says that, historically, there were few. Someone else responds that it shouldn't matter, as the game ignores other aspects of history and ultimately inclusiveness can be more worthwhile than arbitrary historical accuracy. Someone else says that person is dumb. Someone else says white people rule. It devolves to both sides accusing the other of bigotry.

Should you focus on that devolution, or the job initial feature request? For Kingdom Come, the game wasn't called racist, but the lengthy screeds the dev wrote were. See how that works? The reaction matters. The reasoning they offer.

Like, your endless buzzwords of what pisses you off makes me wonder about your actual feelings are towards lgbtqs.

It's not a reasonable request, they're demanding that their views are more important than the developers, and features just can't be added in willy nilly-they take time and money. In the end, a "reasonable request" just isn't worth it solely for the buzzword of "diversity".

Ok. Next time you complain about any design decision, be it loot crates or invisible walls, I'll say you aren't being reasonable and that you're demanding your views on what makes a game appealing are more important than the devs.

Also, be sure to call out Icewind for opening this line of reasoning by saying his views were more important than Your Royal Gayness dev's, for him complaining about shoehorning or whatever.

jdreyer wrote on Jan 31, 2018, 05:16:

Razumen wrote on Jan 31, 2018, 00:15:

It's not a reasonable request, they're demanding that their views are more important than the developers, and features just can't be added in willy nilly-they take time and money. In the end, a "reasonable request" just isn't worth it solely for the buzzword of "diversity".

If not "diversity" then what about "sales?" More diversity means a wider potential audience.

Beamer wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 14:42:

FloorPie wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 14:27:

Beamer wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 14:03:

Icewind wrote on Jan 30, 2018, 13:59:
Every indie game nowadays has to be about sexual identity.

I miss when indie games were just about shooting monsters and walking through dungeons.

If you play games to learn about the world around you, then you need to get out more. You can learn about LGBTQ issues anywhere in the real world, you don't need a game. I think these folks are all shut-ins that need a game to tell them about life.

Me? I play games to get away from all the life i'm over-exposed to on a daily basis.

Or maybe the games you want are still out there, only now there's choice for more people, and more people see themselves represented in their game options than before.

I don't get why some people expect every single game to be tailored to their desires.

Yet, some groups are forcing everyone else to tailor their entertainment to satisfy that group's personal desires. If you don't then you're a horrible horrible person. See the Kingdom Come: Delieverance dramas for example. "You need Moors in your 1400s Bohemian game you bigot!"

This game looks gay in all the meanings of that word. I'd not really care if we didn't have people demanding transgender were-dragonkin romances in every silly bioware type (nerd love simulator) game. Heh, I almost yearn for the day when the big scandal was romancing Jahiera in Baldurs Gate just after her husband dies.

Is this true and reality, or do you ignore reasonable requests and pay attention to reactions to reactions to reactions?

Case in point: a game has no black people. Someone says "I'd like this more if there were black people." Sounds reasonable, no? Someone else says that, historically, there were few. Someone else responds that it shouldn't matter, as the game ignores other aspects of history and ultimately inclusiveness can be more worthwhile than arbitrary historical accuracy. Someone else says that person is dumb. Someone else says white people rule. It devolves to both sides accusing the other of bigotry.

Should you focus on that devolution, or the job initial feature request? For Kingdom Come, the game wasn't called racist, but the lengthy screeds the dev wrote were. See how that works? The reaction matters. The reasoning they offer.

Like, your endless buzzwords of what pisses you off makes me wonder about your actual feelings are towards lgbtqs.

Orogogus wrote on Dec 2, 2017, 04:15:

Quboid wrote on Dec 1, 2017, 21:42:
Do you think it's impossible for propaganda to reference actual events, even if they had been represented accurately?

More to the point, they're not represented accurately. The three videos contain lies and mischaracterizations, and ignore context.
Snopes

But the hate speech part of it is this -- even the most pro-gun control liberals don't suggest that every gun owner is a violent murderer. They don't respond to mass shootings in the news with, "Oh, sure, there are good gun owners out there." Using a video of an extremist to say the entire religion is evil is as stupid as if you broadened the generalization to say that all religion is evil, or if aliens from Alpha Centauri used it to conclude that all humans were evil, or carbon-based life.

If the religion were as vile as all that, people wouldn't be cherry-picking videos from political riots and straight up making things up, there'd be actual videos taken at home of the Muslim next door running amok, of preachers in the US advocating violence and oppression.

Muscular Beaver wrote on Sep 25, 2017, 11:11:

Razumen wrote on Sep 24, 2017, 21:06:

Muscular Beaver wrote on Sep 22, 2017, 21:11:

Alamar wrote on Sep 22, 2017, 11:35:
Did PUBG do anything original? Serious question... No interest in it, and didn't even know Fortnite had a Battle Royale mode, which as a game concept has been around since what, the first generation of shooters?

?
Battle Royale is pretty new. And the guy who created PUBG was pretty much the father of it. So no, theres not much new in it, except some details. But why should it be a concern, if that guy invented that game type anyway? He knew what the other games/mods lacked and he made it better. He succeeded like a boss.

Lol, Battle Royale is not new, as a gameplay mode it's existed in countless games, mods, and other things way before PUBG. There's even a Japanese movie made in 2000 that is the inspiration for most of these games. It's only recently become so popular because the a popular developer finally came up with a combination of mechanics (scavenging, open world) that appeals to a large amount of people. Nothing in PUBG is really new, and the developer certainly didn't create the genre, though I do give him credit for HOW he's made the game.

Nope sorry. Its pretty new. The first one was a DayZ/Arma 2 mod. That is pretty new as a genre.
And yes he created the genre. The others werent called battle royale and they lacked important parts of what defines battle royale. Its that simple

Muscular Beaver wrote on Sep 22, 2017, 21:11:

Alamar wrote on Sep 22, 2017, 11:35:
Did PUBG do anything original? Serious question... No interest in it, and didn't even know Fortnite had a Battle Royale mode, which as a game concept has been around since what, the first generation of shooters?

?
Battle Royale is pretty new. And the guy who created PUBG was pretty much the father of it. So no, theres not much new in it, except some details. But why should it be a concern, if that guy invented that game type anyway? He knew what the other games/mods lacked and he made it better. He succeeded like a boss.

HoSpanky wrote on Sep 23, 2017, 12:45:

jdreyer wrote on Sep 23, 2017, 12:36:
I kind of deplore our throwaway society. Nothing is built to be fixed easily. Things are intentionally designed to be hard as to encourage you to buy a new one. And due to said design fixing becomes more expensive, often approaching or even exceeding the cost of getting a new one. Sad and wasteful.

I 100% agree with this on car designs...simple processes like an oil change can become in redibly difficult due to absurd filter placement.

But on cellphones, specifically, it SOMEWHAT makes sense. There's an awful lot of stuff crammed into a tiny package. The guts are delicate, and the average American is a ham fisted buffoon. Realize, the people on this board are NOT "average".

Not even Cutter.

Wallshadows wrote on Jun 1, 2017, 10:35:

The Half Elf wrote on Jun 1, 2017, 10:06:
So since he's the game designer, was he in charge of lies about micro-transactions, absurd amount of pay to win bullshit?

Pretty much what I came in to ask as well. If he's from the pre-bullshit era then it gives him more credibility as far as not being a huge shithead is concerned.

As far as the game is concerned, I'm not for or against these types of games so I'll keep an open mind about it.