Cutter wrote on Feb 22, 2020, 13:00:
Russia helping Bernie? What a crock of shite. Trump and Moscow Mitch already work for Putin, there's zero gain in helping Bernie become Prez.

Well, if you're not friendly to the US, and you're Russia, then supporting Bernie without his knowledge spreads distrust. And it works all the better when you have people who don't understand what Democratic Socialism is, or who try to (like Boomberg) suggest that Bernie is a communist.

I'm a little disappointed in Blue for posting it without a comment of any sort, but I know he has to parse through a lot of stuff, and can't comment on it all.

Beamer wrote on Jan 23, 2020, 09:38:
As annoying as the China censor-creep into Hollywood is, it's far less that the sinister Chinese government is forcing anything or funding anything, and far more that the Chinese box office for blockbusters is generally 50%-150% of the US box office.

If you're a cynical, publicly traded company producing cynical products designed to appeal to the widest audience possible, this means having to enter China. A $200MM movie will make its money back faster if it doesn't ignore 30% of the global market.

So they avoid anything the Chinese censors will dislike, and often add something the Chinese audience will. Not doing so means missing hundreds of millions of dollars. And it isn't as if we have many movies being made for art or creative purposes anymore. There isn't a whole lot left out there other than giant blockbusters carefully crafted to appeal to literally every single human being on the planet. It's why I find TV much more satisfying (also, it's why network television blows.)

What you just described it how they "force" and "fund" ideas. Their market has money to spend that outside companies want. Let's call that market square. The Chinese Government keeps their market square through censorship of media inside of China. They don't impose anything outside of China, but they do have a lot of money available inside of China.

The outside companies are from markets that are round and can accept many shapes of media. Luckily for the companies, that round market can ALSO fit square media. Square media sells well in China, and there is lots of money to earn in China. So they produce square media.

As a result, the Chinese censorship expands beyond the borders of China, not through force, but through coercive money, and our round markets start seeing a big uptick in square media, and square ideas, and a downswing in media and ideas that won't fit the square market.

Slashman wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 17:09:

jdreyer wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 16:21:
While every Chinese company has to do what the government tells them, I haven't gotten the sense that Tencent is particularly beholden to or controlled by the CCP. I oppose consolidation as a general rule, so I think this acquisition isn't good, and you'll find me a constant critic of the Chinese government on this forum. That said, Hollywood catering to the Chinese market is a trend that will continue, IMO.

Yes it may seem that Tencent is not beholden to the CCP...until the CCP asks them to do something or allow something and they comply.

The problem isn't Chinese people. I have a few Chinese friends and Chinese people have been residents on the island for as long as I can remember. The issue is that these common folk have no power to fight back against a government that still dabbles in forced organ donations and "reeducation camps". Well that's not exactly true...collectively they could fight back but it would take a hell of a lot to make them move in that direction.

This makes it hard to trust ANY Chinese based company because they ultimately do not answer to anyone else except their authoritarian government.

That really is my problem. And Tencent is involved in so much. Many of the movies that come out that have token elements put in to please Chinese audiences have Tencent in their credits if you dig around for a while. So it's rarely right up front.

jdreyer wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 14:46:

Blue wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 14:28:

PHJF wrote on Jan 22, 2020, 12:57:
So we watched Godzilla Saturday (my gf’s idea), and while the whole movie was tremendously fucking awful, the thing that stuck out most was the shoehorning in of a totally random Chinese character. My first instinct was wow this must be a Chinese-backed movie... and sure enough it is.

Yes, shoehorning a character from a giant media market into a Godzilla movie just to appeal to a wider audience is an unprecedented catastrophe.

LOL.

Skull Island had a Chinese character, as did The Meg, and both of them were fun romps. When a movie is bad, it makes like actor and product placement stick out. Still hard to blame them for wanting to appeal to a market of 1.4B people. Also, hooray for more Asians in Hollywood films. We've come a long way since Long Duk Dong.

I find it very easy to blame them. It's tokenism at best. While the Chinese people aren't to blame, if Tencent is involved, they don't represent the Chinese people, they represent the government of China. And the government of China is authoritarian with dictatorial leanings thanks to the recent removal of term limits and expansion of presidential power. Tencent and the government of China should not be further enriched by external corporations for their own profit.

Cutter wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 16:53:

jdreyer wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 16:27:

Cutter wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 14:16:

theyarecomingforyou wrote on Jan 19, 2020, 13:06:
Now we have confirmation from Amazon that not only did it licence Lumberyard to CIG (which was publicly known) but also CryEngine, meaning that CIG cannot be in breach of the GLA with Crytek. Not that Crytek's claim had any merit, as the GLA specifically included Star Citizen AND Squadron 42.

Crytek attempted to extort CIG and now it looks like it will be on the hook for over $500,000 in legal costs, possibly a lot more. Crytek should be focused on paying its own employees rather than filing baseless lawsuits that will create even more of a blackhole in its finances.

Are you privy to the original contract between Crytek and CIG? If not than how would you possibly know? All I've seen is the usual convoluted mess of their PR people engaging in he said/she said.

Haven't they been releasing the contract text? I could have sworn I read some of it last year.

Since when are contract specifics public knowledge? Anywhere? All I've read since this bullshit began is claim vs. counterclaim - same as any public dispute - that's long on claims and short on actual facts.

They have released to the court and public viewing the GLA, or game license agreement, which is the contract between CIG and Crytek. The court ruled previously that the GLA does not require CIG to use Cryengine as provided by Crytek, but rather allows them to do so.

chickenboo wrote on Dec 12, 2019, 19:36:
Good Op Ed, but it boils down consumer backlash to noisy racists/trolls, labelling all dissenting opinions about the EGS to the association with a few noisy rude loudmouths on twitter. It's like labelling all of the protesters in Hong Kong as dangerous radical looting rioters because a few bad seeds are present.

The arguing against EGS definitely comes off as petty - it's just a store front, big deal - but games sold on Kickstarter guaranteeing Steam keys and then suddenly taking EGS exclusivity deals while riding the association with the Steam store front is pretty misleading and bad practice. Ditto Metro Exodus who announced two weeks before launch that they're going EGS Exclusive, the backlash for that is pretty deserved, and despite there being a lot of horrible direct abuse and attacks which are never warranted, there's a hell of a lot of decent, reserved commentary on why this is a bad thing. It's pretty annoying that this Op Ed glosses over that in favor of portraying every game consumer with the same rabid/troll/racist/pigheaded paintbrush.

The 88/12 deal is fine for producers but the argument it will lead to more and better games is simply misleading. It's like when businesses say that any increase in taxes represents one less employee that could be hired, implying they would have hired extra people if they had the money, not that that ever really happens. Look at Mechwarrior 5 Mercs: the game just released, it's riddled with poor grammar, spelling mistakes, the story is some weak revenge tale with one dimensional characters who don't even more, they just stand there stock still. From what I've read the missions are dead simple and don't offer branching paths that even MW2 Mercs managed to do (complete your contract with A or do what B suggests and get double the payout). You mean to tell me this developer took the EGS payout, and this is what we get? How do you release a V1.0 with grammar and spelling mistakes? I thought 88/12 split was supposed to improve the quality of games.

Until we get clear proof from developers of what they were able to achieve with the generous EGS earnings split and a demonstration of what would have been left off the table without it, why should I believe them that it's in MY best interests to buy from this store, that exclusivity is worth it? And when/if Steam eventually meets the 88/12 split... are we going to see these fabled lands of better games now that devs get 18% more, or will it be status quo...

I couldn't have responded better if I tried. A well reasoned, well explained set of observations and beliefs.

...

Just what I'd expect from a noisy rude loudmouth on twitter, or Hong Kong Rioter!!

Luke wrote on Nov 26, 2019, 08:20:

Choobeastia wrote on Nov 25, 2019, 20:27:

Thakk wrote on Nov 24, 2019, 14:45:
I've dropped about $1k on the promise of CR's vision. I hope it comes to fruition. I'm fine with the spent funds. Will I be contributing anymore funds in the short-term? No. I've given enough. If/when the IP ships, that's when I'll determine to give more.

As a former Project Manager of software developers, I've been having a blast following the ups and downs and I've met some great people along the way. I know all to well the JIRA jargoon and Project Manager speak they've incorporated these past few years. It's a slog, no doubt about it, especially with scope creep. I wish them the best of luck.

Ahh a believer....never fails to make one laugh , keep telling to youself and it will be true...in ya head 350$ sick


Are you sure you're on the right webpage? My impression was that people were only allowed to call it a scam, joke about it never coming out, or act like it's their duty to love it around these parts. *offers a map*

All jokes aside, I agree. I'm not in as far as you (about $350 here), but I don't have any regrets. I enjoy watching the progress, and it's been a blast seeing different components come online. SOCS is a huge one, and I look forward to when that blossoms into Server Meshing.

I think you messed up the quote.

Regardless, I'm not sure what's sick about it? I don't buy movies, and I don't buy many games. Instead I support a dream that might or might not be completed, and pay monthly to patreons of content creators I like. In the end, I'm putting money towards things I enjoy, which sounds like what everyone is doing, so it seems pretty normal to me.

GinRummy wrote on Nov 25, 2019, 10:35:
For all the millions of words argued about this game so far, nobody ever actually talks about the state of gameplay in it. Is it an empty solo place? Are there people, quests, enemies, planets, etc. yet even in beta form? What is coming soon and is it actually worth trying the demos now? I suppose I could install it myself and see, but that's work others could do and just tell me.

There is a limited sandbox. The state of your account and progress is generally persistent during each quarterly patch, and you can engage in the following in the play space available:

1> Trading (buying/selling commodities and shipping them)
2> Answering distress beacons (NPC requests for combat assistance, newer feature, not consistently working)
3> Bounty Hunting (Fly to a place, destroy target, get paid)
4> Scan for, find, and destroy spy satellites around Comm Relays.
5a> Go to a wreck and retrieve the black box and bring it back
5b> Go to a wreck and collect the dog tags of the crew to find a specific dead crew members
5c> Go to a wreck and find specific cargo and bring it back
6a> Collect specific cargo from one location, and bring it to another (small quantity transport)
6b> Find a target, destroy, retrieve cargo, deliver
7> Repel boarders on a security station
8> Repel player trying to hack a Comm Array
9> Repel a player trying to hack a security station
10a> Hack a Comm Array
10b> Reset a hacked Comm Array
11> Search a cave for a lost cave diver
12> Ship mining if you have a Prospector
13> Hand mining if you don't have a Prospector
14a> Raid a drug lab, destroy turrets protecting it, kill NPCs present, return with specific drugs
14b> Raid a drug lab, stop another player from stealing the drugs, destroy as many drugs as you can.

And a whole lot more. Much of it works consistently, some of it less so. On top of that, you can now rent ships to enable you to expand the style of missions you can engage in, you can work with others on their ships, and you can use your IN-GAME money to purchase ships (Watch Astropub's Zero to Hero streams sometime). FINALLY, in 3.8 (coming in December), money and in-game purchases will be persistent through several major patches to let people mess around more.

The game has TONS of bugs. It is clearly in a state of active development, and that means there will be nights where a player runs into so many bugs they just lose their mind and want to stop playing. And other nights where someone will run into no bugs at all.

I wouldn't recommend anyone pledge money to the game until we have more bug fixing, and a better tutorial than what we have. But I would recommend people try out free fly events to see how things stand, and if they and their friends have fun.

Hope that helps!

This comment was edited on Nov 25, 2019, 22:34.

Cutter wrote on Nov 24, 2019, 17:29:
And each one of those virtual ships is available to you for only several thousand dollars a pop! What a bargain!!!

Your hyperbole is getting lazy. There are a couple that high, but the VAST majority of the vehicles are lower, with starter packages as low as $45 and 83 flyable/driveable, so basically less than most AAA games with more vehicle variety than most of those would have as well.

At least figure out a semi-accurate way to be crappy about an interest you don't share.

Thakk wrote on Nov 24, 2019, 14:45:
I've dropped about $1k on the promise of CR's vision. I hope it comes to fruition. I'm fine with the spent funds. Will I be contributing anymore funds in the short-term? No. I've given enough. If/when the IP ships, that's when I'll determine to give more.

As a former Project Manager of software developers, I've been having a blast following the ups and downs and I've met some great people along the way. I know all to well the JIRA jargoon and Project Manager speak they've incorporated these past few years. It's a slog, no doubt about it, especially with scope creep. I wish them the best of luck.

Are you sure you're on the right webpage? My impression was that people were only allowed to call it a scam, joke about it never coming out, or act like it's their duty to love it around these parts. *offers a map*

All jokes aside, I agree. I'm not in as far as you (about $350 here), but I don't have any regrets. I enjoy watching the progress, and it's been a blast seeing different components come online. SOCS is a huge one, and I look forward to when that blossoms into Server Meshing.

This comment was edited on Nov 25, 2019, 20:39.

MeanJim wrote on Nov 15, 2019, 22:37:
Even if I were interested, it would be a no buy for these reasons:

3rd-party DRM:
* Denuvo
* EA on-line activation and Origin client software installation and background use required.
* Requires 3rd-Party Account: EA Account (Supports Linking to Steam Account)

Understandable if you haven't made that leap previously. For me, Origin isn't a big issue, as I have Origin Access, and save a ton of money on games monthly that way.

One correction, though. The game doesn't us Denuvo DRM. At least, I have not been able to find any references to it on the Origin page, on the Steam Page, or doing searches on the internet.

Game has some issues online, but it is improving. It is frustrating when they have so many of these same issues covered in GTA Online.

That being said, it plays well for me, I don't get crashes or hitching, and I don't really have any bugs.

There are no aimbots or other cheats I've seen. If you don't have aim assist turned off before logging in to the online mode, you end up getting matched with people using aim assist, and that is waaay better than keyboard and mouse unless you're exceptionally good with K&M.

Darks wrote on Oct 20, 2019, 18:56:

Choobeastia wrote on Oct 20, 2019, 12:44:

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Oct 20, 2019, 02:32:

Darks wrote on Oct 20, 2019, 02:13:

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Oct 19, 2019, 21:35:

Darks wrote on Oct 19, 2019, 19:02:
Freed huh? yea, there is nothing free about this POS game. its all locked behind DLC. Cost you 20 times more to unlocked everything then it would have to just buy the game. Screw that BS!!!

It's funny that everyone that doesn't play this game has this opinion, while the rest of us that do play the game like the DLC policy.

And you are exactly why these shit heel publishers do the shit they do. You must be so proud!!

Even with all the DLC paid at full price, my price per hour played is ridiculously low. That's the only metric I care about.

I'm right there with you. Even if I paid the full $191 for Stellaris, plus 3 full expansions, plus many story packs and others, I am at about $0.15 an hour with 1281 hours played. It would cost me more than that in gas to go to a nearby donut shop and just look at the donuts.

Basically, the PDX model is a proper business model to keep up with inflation, and not something designed to bilk some people out of tons of cash via micro-transactions and loot boxes.

You guys are a bunch of delusional assholes. I dont care how you break it down,. price gouging is gouging no matter how you guys try and justify it. SMH!!!

I suppose the issue is, I don't consider it price gouging. The $40 base game was a full game in it's own right. One could have that, play it, and have tons of fun with ONLY that. Add to that the continued post-launch patch support refining and improving the game, and free additions, and that is a super reasonable price. The rest of it is just adding new content, and I guess I don't see the problem with paying $20 to add an extensive amount of content to a game.

The alternative is.. what? I spend $20 on another game? That's possible, but if I get the same or more joy out of the $20 spent expanding the first, how exactly is that price gouging?

Or to go down your path, it's people like you that make companies nickle and dime us with micro-transactions, because you consider a reasonable expansion at a reasonable price price gouging.

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Oct 20, 2019, 02:32:

Darks wrote on Oct 20, 2019, 02:13:

BIGtrouble77 wrote on Oct 19, 2019, 21:35:

Darks wrote on Oct 19, 2019, 19:02:
Freed huh? yea, there is nothing free about this POS game. its all locked behind DLC. Cost you 20 times more to unlocked everything then it would have to just buy the game. Screw that BS!!!

It's funny that everyone that doesn't play this game has this opinion, while the rest of us that do play the game like the DLC policy.

And you are exactly why these shit heel publishers do the shit they do. You must be so proud!!

Even with all the DLC paid at full price, my price per hour played is ridiculously low. That's the only metric I care about.

I'm right there with you. Even if I paid the full $191 for Stellaris, plus 3 full expansions, plus many story packs and others, I am at about $0.15 an hour with 1281 hours played. It would cost me more than that in gas to go to a nearby donut shop and just look at the donuts.

Basically, the PDX model is a proper business model to keep up with inflation, and not something designed to bilk some people out of tons of cash via micro-transactions and loot boxes.

My interest in giving more money to China is incredibly low. I have nothing against the Chinese people and wish them the best, but money sent to China won't help them. The push into American and European media by China is heavily backed by their totalitarian government.

Long story short, anything from Riot (and some others) is a pass.

Kxmode wrote on Jun 11, 2019, 16:45:

Cutter wrote on Jun 11, 2019, 11:35:
Oh right, EGS exclusive = hard pass.

September 2020, available on Steam... soft pass. I don't reward developers who engage in deception.

Better yet, buy it through the Humble store and change the amount given to the devs to 0.

I've been looking for a copy of this for months, because I felt like playing through it again and couldn't find my physical copy. Lo and behold, I couldn't find it anywhere online, even when it used to be on steam. Now I know why... they got rid of it so that it wasn't competing against itself.

My condolences, to you and yours. It will be a tough time, but take solace in the thought that if there is an afterlife, he and Hudson will be together again.

ldonyo wrote on Jan 25, 2019, 11:07:

Darks wrote on Jan 25, 2019, 10:58:

Clu32 wrote on Jan 25, 2019, 10:54:
did anyone even ask for this?

Nope, I think mainly we have been wanting more content added to the world and the option to host our own servers. None of this forced in pvp bullshit.

In fact, the exact opposite of this has been asked for; the ability to completely opt out of PvP. Instead, they've nerfed weapons and added ambush PvP, err "survival mode".

That has been asked for. And many PvPers have also asked for this mode, as they don't like the fact that people can just log out if they don't want to PvP, or potentially walk away.

Either way, more options isn't a bad thing. Especially if it's optional.

It could be a fun game, it could not be. I don't care enough to try the demo, I'll just wait for some release-state gameplay footage. As it stands, the footage I've seen makes the gunplay look interesting, but the powers (short of the ultimates) look like they are completely lacking in punch.

And while part of me is glad that the team that did ME 1 and 2 are back on this, I also kind of wish they weren't? ME 1 and 2 were good games, but their combat gameplay was rather poor. Here's hoping they worked with some of the Andromeda folks on how to make combat engaging, because where that game failed in RPG and story, it had combat and driving down pat.