Axis wrote on Aug 20, 2015, 17:27:
Not sure what reality you guys are living in, but "video games" in the 80s was magical and evolutionary. We're talking TI99 and C64 time, when most people didn't even know what one of those were, let alone any "saturation", and BBs's and 75 baud modems were all the rage...

Talk about rewriting history... none of you must have been around then, hell 90% of those here on blues were likely not even born.

I'm from the 70s. I remember entering code by hand from C64 Type-In books to make my own games on the C64 my neighbors had across the road from where I grew up in the mid-80s. Yes, it was awesome for my lucky poor self who grew up in a house that couldn't afford an Atari never mind a computer. I remember trying to play the tapes we saved those programs on in my cassette player just to see what it would sound like (Autechre comes to mind).

Would you like to make more baseless judgements about me?

If you don't think there was a console crash (which counted for the bulk of the video game industry at the time) then do explain why they became dirt cheap and more or less disappeared from shelves until the NES came along? Sure, fans (usually kids) were happy to scoop up as many crappy Atari or Colecovision cartridges as they could find. I also remember kids getting really excited about collecting pieces of round cardboard when the powers that be started calling them Pogs. Hardly the best judges of quality.

The author tried to pin the crash on piracy rather than quality of product. The market in the late 90s became saturated and the quality offered by new consoles was comparable or outright better. Not unlike the invert of what happened in the 80s only this time the alternative was actually cheaper too. And not unlike what's happening now with indies with so many people deciding they're 'game developers' because they downloaded Unity and made something you can click around in and blaming harassment for the fact that they didn't actually make something noteworthy same as so many other clowns stuffing Steam to the gills.

Being called out for not just making, but asking money for yet another crappy sandbox/zombie/survival/roguelike/relationship-sim/therapy session/art project/whatever might hurt but it's not harassment when it's pointing out the obvious.

So was the first video game industry crash in the mid 80s also due to piracy or over saturation of the market? Or does it not count because it was consoles?

Also PC market and PC Game market are not at all the same thing.

I also seem to remember most of my peers (all of us taking game design in college in the late 90s) starting with PCs but ending with consoles like the Dreamcast / PS2 / N64 etc. because aside from FPS and RTS games (which were becoming oversaturated - why does that sound familiar) gaming was prettier and more fun on a console. Hell, Soul Calibur on Dreamcast looked nicer on a home TV than the actual arcade version.

That's not too say a top end PC couldn't push nicer graphics, but you needed to pay at least 4 times more money than a console and hope the game supported all the bells and whistles.

People leave PC gaming because it's still a parasitic industry. That's not to say harassment isn't an issue but it is absolutely not the root cause. You're bled of your talent and time and if you don't like it no one cares because there are always more and more young people fresh out of school willing to do it for a notch above minimum wage because they still think making video games all day must be as awesome as playing video games all day. It's not.

And even those who have a realistic view of development will likely have to accept predatory contracts for the sake of gaining experience because the only other option is to go indie and unless you've got some killer IP or come from a rich family or some sort of venture capital backing you up, you're going to need a '2nd' (real) job to pay the bills.

I must have been a weird kid because I don't remember losing the marbles to Hungry, Hungry, Hippos. Same as the marbles that came with the Pac-Man board game.

Retired wrote on Aug 19, 2015, 13:18:
The bag most likely leaked. I keep ours in the basement and only bring up a few at a time. It is surprising how fast potatoes go bad. The liquid that the things excrete is noxious. I would wipe the area with a bleach solution, then water.

I second this. Especially considering the heat and humidity that the east coast has been getting recently. If you're not comfortable using bleach where you'll store food then vinegar should suffice.

Another potential option that I haven't seen mentioned is a small bowl of vanilla, not sure if it really absorbs or just masks the odor but it's WAY more pleasant than rotten potato juice.

Something else I remember my mom doing back in the day was boiling yeast to get rid of (or at least overpower) smells. Our bathroom was connected to the kitchen and sometimes you just have the stomach flu and, well, NO ONE wants to smell diarrhea before or during mealtime (or pretty much ever).

Kxmode wrote on Aug 19, 2015, 00:07:
This is like the scene in "A Few Good Men" when Jessep admits to ordering the death of PFC Santiago in a court of law.

So does this mean that only Chris Roberts can handle the truth?

I'm still concerned about some of the comments he made a while ago when demonstrating the multi-crew ships and stating stuff like "You're not going to have 50 systems to adventure in" and "I'm actually expecting people to make up their own action story arc". I guess people were more concerned with whether or not they'd all have the same gravity within the big ships.

At this point it sounds like it's just going to be a hollow collection of modules that you can interact (and hopefully have fun) with... because no one has ever had to deal with griefers in an online environment before. Nope, no siree, especially not when there's so much open potential (ie: very little planned activity).

Task wrote on Aug 11, 2015, 09:58:
FPS/RTS/RPG combine all the things! I'm assuming they have other sources of income - for 6+ studio to operate off 12,500 would be quite a feat.

Well they do state having worked on the game for the last 3 years so yeah probably other money involved

Though it's an interesting way to wrap up development. From the sounds of things it's essentially done and this whole KS thing is more about what sort of extra polish / features people want on top of the base game.

killer_roach wrote on Aug 10, 2015, 18:47:

saluk wrote on Aug 10, 2015, 17:44:
Come on Tom Hall get your pitch together!

Damn, beat me to it. (I know he'd rather buy the IP outright, but if Squeenix is willing to take a pitch seriously...)

Absolutely agreed. I don't want to hear about it if he's not going to be involved.

Seriously though, who else could dance like Sly Boots?

Task wrote on Aug 7, 2015, 10:14:
Would anyone like to hedge bets how long the DS game is going to last on Steam?

Why wouldn't it? If you go into a DS game expecting the modern AAA hand holding 'mechanics' rather than complex (bordering on convoluted) systems of interaction that's on you, kind of like expecting something like Europa Universalis to play like Age of Empires. His games won't change the industry but they offer something to a niche group.

Considering all the times people on this site have screamed about fraud when a crowdfunded project went a little sideways this would be an appropriate time to go that direction. The excuses from the developer are weak.

The first 'patch' broke the progress of the game? Ok, shit happens, where's the hotfix?
Oh, the other levels don't load because of a naming issue. Rename the files and... hotfix.
Users have tried renaming the files to get them to load. They don't.
Developer blamed a patch but didn't release a fix.
Developer went onto twitter to post a pic of a bloodshot eye and claimed illness to justify the situation. And that picture is either a stock image or the developer isn't old enough to drive yet.

The whole thing is a mess.

eRe4s3r wrote on Aug 5, 2015, 20:13:

To me yes, the loading screens are the worst part.

Why did you have to bring back that memory..

You're able to remember anything else from the game?

Seriously though, Pillars of Eternity is what I play when I feel like gaming on a handheld device. Especially once the action moved into cities and the pacing of the 'action' became load screen, short walk, load screen, quest trigger (single combat or conversation), load screen, short walk, pick another area on the world map, and watch the load screens some more.

I like everything else about it but those load times really just suck the wind out of the sails though.

This comment was edited on Aug 6, 2015, 10:12.

nin wrote on Aug 3, 2015, 20:38:
I'm still pissed they're dropping keyboards, to the point that I'm leaning towards not buying it...

I hear you there. Seems Harmonix is banking on the casual karaoke party angle for its entire success. I suppose it does make sense to focus your product, just sucks for those of us who played it more than casually once the new product honeymoon phase ended.

I was originally planning on buying a new console for this launch. Then it was just a pre-order at first and a console during the inevitable holiday deals. Now it's I'll wait and see what sort of post-launch plan they offer before deciding.

Mainly how and when will online play work?
How smoothly will legacy content import (and exactly how much will carry over)?
Will they ever support the madcatz midi adapter for pro gear?

I'm really glad to know they're hard at work trying to make sure the stage kit will function though. Gotta have smoke and lights going right?

jdreyer wrote on Aug 2, 2015, 14:35:
Also, are there patches out there that "fix" what's overly consoly about this game?

Even on a console it's yucky. I got it for free on psn+ along with Dishonored a while ago and finally got around to trying them recently. I gave Thief an honest go first, but by chapter 3 it still sucked.

Then I tried Dishonored and, well, I got the game I was expecting to play in the first place.

Oh man I've wanted an open ended Mercenaries style mech campaign since MW2 Mercs way back in the day. Coupled with the gameplay style of the recent Shadowrun games and I'm pretty freaking stoked.

jacobvandy wrote on Jul 28, 2015, 15:12:
With that being said, I'm not convinced removing skills would really be a bad thing. If everything relies on your SPECIAL stats, and leveling provides you with one or a few perk point(s) each ding to progress through an expanded perk tree, all you've really done is remove the arbitrary requirement that you must have hacked 100 easy systems before you can hack medium ones, or used a pistol for 3 hours before you can use a rifle. Why should that matter if I rolled my character to be super intelligent and/or agile from the beginning?

I'll admit I haven't played F3 in years but I don't remember skill grind like that (or did they change it in NV?). Elder Scrolls? For sure. Jump everywhere to get super athletics etc. But from what I remember it was always just allocate more points until you've got a decent success chance in whatever skill. That's not grind just point allocation on level up (based on INT).

Though lock picking / hacking being tied to 25% increments with not even a 1% chance of success unless you had X minimum was lame.

dj LiTh wrote on Jul 28, 2015, 13:55:

Couldnt disagree more, and i had a few thousand hours playing multiplayer ladder 1v1, 2v2 in SC1, people who focused on defense fromt he beginning already lost. The game was being dicated to them and controlled the entire way through. You watch any player with a modicum of skill and you will see that defensive play style beyond protecting your own workers was always a losing strategy

Fair enough (I only ever got competitive with the first Red Alert) but the defensive option was removed from even casual play in the sequel. I also seem to recall turtling as a Terran in the early game to focus on Battlecruisers or nukes being somewhat effective in the original (again casual). On the flipside it seemed that just building a bunker in SC2 was a waste of resources outside of the campaign.

Also 100% behind your assessment about SC2 / D3 and how they evolved or didn't.

InBlack wrote on Jul 28, 2015, 02:23:
SC2 was just more of the same old SC formula, which is actually good. The reason none of us play it anymore or have the stomach for it is because we got burned out on SC1 and Brood War all those years ago, and it's not like we are getting any younger or our APM is getting any faster.

Gotta disagree with you there aside from the APM thing. In the original Starcraft a player who focused entirely on defense could hold their own against a player or AI who focused entirely on offense. There was an actual balance. This was removed with SC2. It simply was not possible to chose a defensive play style. You rushed (first) or you lost - period. I definitely wasn't burnt out from the original when I got the sequel, it's just too different of a MP game.

As for the campaign, it had potential but for the most part it was crap. Here's a specific mission tailored to a specific unit that has no other real value outside of this specific mission. While it's not uncommon to showcase new units in tailored missions when it counts for like 90% of the campaign it's pretty lame.

And the campaign was especially frustrating considering half the new units weren't even available in multiplayer either. The early impression was that players would be able to customize their available unit roster for greater variety in MP, but we all know how that turned out. I won't actually call it a bad game, but I'll never say it was better than the original. Prettier, but not better.

Funny.

When Starcraft turned 5 I still played it on a regular basis. If not 3-4 times a week, sometimes alone vs. AI, sometimes with friends. Ahh... Big Game Hunters such a good map.

I bought SC2 at launch. I don't remember the last time I played it and when I did it was tower defense mods. The whole 'if you don't rush you lose' core mechanic really didn't do it for me.

BadIronTree wrote on Jul 21, 2015, 12:00:

You must be new
All the videos (10 for the chairman & Around the verse etc) are paid voluntarily from people that subscribe for an extra 10$ or 20$ per month. And all the promotional stuff are from there.

They did this so people will not complain, that they used their money for Promotions video ads etc...

That's like when a person refuses to use their 'fun' money to pay the bills because it's been earmarked for different purposes, then wondering why people are irritated when they choose to keep having fun instead of getting to work to pay down those bills because they're only using the fun money and it's meant for fun, not bills.

Is there any proof the money and resources are being used that way? Aside from them pinkie swearing it totally for really real is? Even with its own separate budget it still seems like an inefficient use of resources.

Especially if they're planning on a big thing at Gamescon. Why not just announce a temporary radio silence for the next month so they could focus? Derek Smart's concerns would have likely been put on hold pending results but instead they made it into a spectacle. It's a great way to keep your name in the press. Not so sure about delivering a product though.

BadIronTree wrote on Jul 21, 2015, 11:31:

Tipsy McStagger wrote on Jul 21, 2015, 10:18:
These damage control statements and videos are actually more worrying than the people causing them.

Soon trolls will ask for CIG to stop giving free coffee to the programmers because "it's their money"

All depends on how many other people are dealing with the camera work / video editing that has to happen to produce one of these clips. Then the costs involved with having (likely) high salaried individuals sitting in front of a camera for the perception of 'openness'. You're fooling yourself if you honestly think that clip is being open and isn't carefully structured to reinforce a specific narrative. I understand the community wanted it this way, that's fine, doesn't mean I (and likely many others) will ever think it's an efficient use of resources.

Free coffee for the people who are actually working towards finishing the product? No one in their right mind will ever complain. Spending any amount of resources to make a video about it though? Yeah that's a totally valid complaint.

SpectralMeat wrote on Jul 21, 2015, 09:51:

“Several years from now, when you are surrounded by your loved ones, and they ask you what did you do during the battle for Space Sims and PC games, you can look them in the eye and say; I helped make Star Citizen.”

Does the man wedgie himself?

Comet wrote on Jul 20, 2015, 16:45:
Actually, they do have oversight. The same kind of oversight in fact.
Microsoft invested $90 Million in Halo MMO before cancelling it.

How does a publisher enforce its position? By not sending more funds unless results are shown.

Exactly the same thing happens with crowdfunding.

The pressure is the same if not higher. Because not only do they have to convince the crowd but they also have to face the public pressure a developer under a publisher deal doesn't suffer.

There's one major difference that you're either forgetting or choosing to ignore in regards to publisher / developer relationships and it can be summed up in one word - contract. As in both sides negotiate while one side plans out a project before the other one agrees to finance it. And generally money gets tied to previously agreed upon milestone deliverables - deliverables, as in something that gets done and delivered. Not just 'working on it', actually 'getting it done'.

Also all that negotiating gets handled before anything starts. The plan is essentially finalized before the first chunk of money is released and the first chunk of money is normally only budgeted to get you to the first major milestone until you get to the last one and finish the product. Crowdfunding is pretty much (exactly) the opposite of that method where the product scope is only defined once the final budget is established and oversight is directly related to how open the developers chose to be.

Convenient that all the people who paid into SC did so as donations, no? Makes it easy for them to address concerns however and whenever they feel like - because they're the ones who decide what oversight to address.