User comment history
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >
| News Comments > Steam Top 10 |
 |
| 26. |
Re: Steam Top 10 |
Aug 22, 2011, 05:19 |
FooAtari |
|
|
| Is having to wait a few hours until you get back from work the next day, over grabbing a couple of hours before bed really the worst thing in the world? Seems like something pretty insignificant to get annoyed about. It's not like your having to wait days and days or anything... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Steam User Loses Almost $1800 in Games Due to Ban [Updated] |
|
| 58. |
Re: Steam User Loses Almost $1800 in Games Due to Ban [Updated] |
Mar 18, 2011, 06:52 |
FooAtari |
|
|
kxmode wrote on Mar 17, 2011, 16:15:
Hopefully the user will learn his or her lesson and not do it again.
Not do what again? TALK about selling is account? He didn't actually sell his account, so he did not break TOS and his account should not have been banned. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Steam User Loses Almost $1800 in Games Due to Ban [Updated] |
|
| 52. |
Re: Steam User Loses Almost $1800 in Games Due to Ban [Updated] |
Mar 15, 2011, 16:41 |
FooAtari |
|
|
Sepharo wrote on Mar 15, 2011, 15:29:
FooAtari wrote on Mar 15, 2011, 13:31:
Bloody hell, I am stunned be these replies.
So you didn't read the thread but you were stunned by the replies?
Where did I say I didn't read it? I did read over the thread, however due to the amount of posts I read over it quite quickly, and may have missed a few points. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Steam User Loses Almost $1800 in Games Due to Ban [Updated] |
|
| 50. |
Re: Steam User Loses Almost $1800 in Games Due to Ban [Updated] |
Mar 15, 2011, 13:31 |
FooAtari |
|
|
Bloody hell, I am stunned be these replies.
I don't think I saw anyone mention this, sorry if they did. But he DIDN'T break Steams TOS.
The TOS states you can't SELL or TRANSFER your account. And sure, if you don't like that, don't buy games on the Steam service.
But, he never actually sold his account. He SPOKE about selling his account, nothing against that in the TOS. So Valve should not have disabled his account until they had confirmed he had actually done so.
It's a bit like me saying "I'm going to kill you" to someone during an argument, and then of course, doing nothing of the kind. But then getting tried and found guilty of murder anyway. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Hardcore: Romero's Not Done With You |
|
| 37. |
Re: Hardcore: Romero's Not Done With You |
Mar 4, 2011, 12:48 |
FooAtari |
|
|
Wraith wrote on Mar 4, 2011, 08:20:
Utter bilge. Doom and Quake were pure technical achievements. Nothing more. In gameplay they were as simplistic as Wolfenstein. Take away the technical genius of John Carmack and what do you have? Below-average games devoid of innovation.
Bilge? Regardless of how much you enjoyed the games surely you can't argue that they were hugely influential and had a large impact on PC gaming. It brought PC gaming to the mainstream and elevated it to an equal platform as consoles in terms of exposure and as a viable format to publish games on for those developers that were not doing so already.
As for being devoid of innovation, this was the early-mid 90's remember, what exactly did you expect? It was a pure run and gun action FPS. That's the way the game was intended to be. Were you PC gamer then? Surely Doom impressed you on some level? How's about their implementation of multi player as innovation? The word death-match is synonymous with FPS's now. We had never seen a game like it before.
Quake had potential they never exploited. They set up the Elder Gods mythos then did NOTHING with it. Oh look a creature - bang! Oh look a trap. Woe is me. Oh look a door. Guess I'd better open that.
Yeah Quake was more of a technical achievement. Which perhaps shouldn't be surprising when Carmack had more control and influence during it's development. And throughout Quake development Romero was already thinking about leaving the company. Of course this was partly his own fault as he spent more time massaging his ego than working on the game by this stage.
Romero gets shit for being a conceited air-head who can't deliver. The only 'game design' he ever did was level editing. Nothing more.
He did more with Doom than level editing. It was his vision and his ideas.
(I mean, seriously... Doom IV guys? Really? It's been 15 years. Let it go.)
Mario, Zelda, Need for Speed and a shed load more games would like a word with you there. Personally I'm quite excited at the thought of another game. Although if it's another Doom 3 it won't be anything special.
This comment was edited on Mar 14, 2011, 06:13. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Hardcore: Romero's Not Done With You |
|
| 26. |
Re: Hardcore: Romero's Not Done With You |
Mar 4, 2011, 04:06 |
FooAtari |
|
|
Mead wrote on Mar 4, 2011, 02:12:
One need only look to his last successful, fun game. Was it Doom II? Welp.
Quake
And so what if his most successful games were released over a decade ago, he still designed some of the most important and influential PC games ever. That alone deserves some attention and respect.
I think he gets a lot of shit for a few bad decisions and mistakes, some of which were not even down to him. As previously mentioned the whole "make you his bitch" thing was NOT his idea.
id were never the same when Romero left. Together the two Johns were awesome. Romero needed someone who could design an engine where he could bring his ideas to reality and Carmack needed a designer who could use his engines to the maximum. A real shame that their ideals at the time where polar opposites as on their own the games they output are not as good as those they did together.
This comment was edited on Mar 14, 2011, 06:16. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Serious Sam 3 Screenshots, Details |
|
| 27. |
Re: Serious Sam 3 Screenshots, Details |
Mar 1, 2011, 05:08 |
FooAtari |
|
|
Cartman wrote on Feb 28, 2011, 20:33:
I've said it for years and years.. I don't know what people see in Duke Nukem. I think the memory is far better than the reality. Kind of like looking back at old girlfriends, lol.
Nah, played it not that long ago. Still great fun. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Legal Briefs |
|
| 1. |
Piracy Cost |
Jan 25, 2011, 10:24 |
FooAtari |
|
|
The trade body has reported that several publishers have claimed illegally downloaded games could outnumber those sold legitimately by as much as 4:1 – and UKIE director general Michael Rawlinson claims that even a 1:1 ratio would be severe.
So how did they come up with those figures?
And anyway, yet again it seems to fail to acknowledge that one pirated copy does not equal one lost sale. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Consolidation |
|
| 8. |
Re: Morning Consolidation |
Jan 21, 2011, 10:47 |
FooAtari |
|
|
"These big games, you get 20 to 50 hours game play, which is tremendous value for money.
"A game like Call of Duty could take two years to make and cost millions of pounds.
"So there are huge sums of money involved in individual games."
So he says we are getting these 20 - 50 hour games, and then uses Call of Duty as an example of development costs. A game that can be completed in 6 or 7 hours...
And anyway, how many quality games do we get of 20 - 50 hours in length... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
13 Comments. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
