User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >
| News Comments > etc. |
|
| 9. |
Re: Dev says game started selling 400% better on Steam after releasing torrent |
Jan 14, 2020, 17:35 |
Korrd |
|
|
Simon Says wrote on Jan 14, 2020, 14:54:
Numerous studies have been conducted on this subject, consensus was overwhelming, personal copies, of any game, no matter it's popularity, translated to more sales Google failed to yield useful results, so if you have links to those studies or the proposed consensus I'd very much like to see them. I don't want to just pile on, but it does seem a quite dubious claim; I rather suspect that whatever the benefits--even if consistent and reliable--for indie games, it wouldn't translate well at all to AAA games for a variety of reasons. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Star Citizen Increased Player Count Experiment |
|
| 53. |
Re: Star Citizen Increased Player Count Experiment |
Jan 12, 2020, 16:32 |
Korrd |
|
|
NasWulf wrote on Jan 12, 2020, 09:46:
Drayth wrote on Jan 11, 2020, 13:14:
SC is no where near a product ready for retail. Neither was Fallout 76 nor Ghost Recon breakpoint, nor Anthem, and they are considered retail finished.
NasWulf wrote on Jan 12, 2020, 09:46:
jdreyer wrote on Jan 12, 2020, 04:06:
"Finished" means that they've developed, tested, and deployed a defined scope. WoW launched with a defined scope, and they added to it later. I don't consider WoW finished.
Then your argument is entirely subjective. If we each get to define what finished means, it becomes meaningless. The developer/publisher determines when a product reaches a state suitable for mass consumption and officially launches the product. It doesn't matter that it may not be up to consumers' standards because it lacks content or is faulty in some way; they chose to release it and that's when pre-release development of the base product ends and post-release support begins, even if that includes delopment of additional content. If I release an app and a year later release an update or bug fix, does that mean my initial release was unfinished? If it does, then that applies to practically every piece of software released in the past 20+ years and claiming that SC different because CIG plans to continue adding to it after release is disingenuous at best. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Morning Metaverse |
|
| 21. |
Re: Morning Metaverse |
Jan 10, 2020, 00:20 |
Korrd |
|
|
Ozmodan wrote on Jan 9, 2020, 16:46:
I have friends who are staunch conservatives and others that are the complete opposite, funny how they mostly want the same thing. Shame we can't have better discourse in this country without all the finger-pointing. I think if you break subjects down to their most basic foundations you'll find people on both sides a lot more reasonable. It's when we resort to demonizing people on the other side and relying on talking points that things go to shit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Star Citizen Increased Player Count Experiment |
|
| 41. |
Re: Star Citizen Increased Player Count Experiment |
Jan 9, 2020, 23:54 |
Korrd |
|
|
clint wrote on Jan 9, 2020, 16:26:
Im assuming this is the cap per instance. Yep. And while I'm hopeful this is just the first increase of many to come in the near future, I won't feel like it's a terribly meaningful change until they implement server meshing and we can do away with the notion of individual instances altogether. Granted, most MMOs today rely heavily on instancing, but in what's supposed to be a living universe only seeing a couple other players at any given time makes it feel pretty damn empty.
Burrito of Peace wrote on Jan 9, 2020, 20:25:
Hadn't played since alpha 2.1.something or other. Fired it up, did all the updates....and it's not bad for what it is. It certainly wasn't the lagfest I remember from the last time I played it. It's definitely a lot better; client-side OCS alone doubled framerates back when they implemented it. Still, character movement remains janky, tick rate is crazy low, and the last time I popped in (3.4, I think), I was still getting stuck on ladders and other ship geometry. It's come a long way, but they've still got a lot to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Into the Black |
|
| 7. |
Re: Into the Black |
Jan 9, 2020, 23:39 |
Korrd |
|
|
Cutter wrote on Jan 9, 2020, 20:28:
You can never go home again. I doubt they can recapture the magic. And besides, post-Serenity? Wash is a very dead leaf on the wind. I agree that losing Wash left me gutted and continuing immediately from that point wouldn't have felt right; the wound was too fresh. But to tell a story of the rest of the crew now years later? I think I'd be on board for that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
|
| 107. |
Re: Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
Jan 8, 2020, 16:45 |
Korrd |
|
|
Dacron wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 16:32:
Korrd wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 16:03:
I suggest we let this go. There's clearly no middle ground to be reached as our positions are logically incompatible and we're already going in circles trying to establish a common perspective of reality. I appreciate that you took the time to participate even if it was ultimately fruitless. Maybe we'll have better luck next time. You suggest I do something you don't can't do yourself? Sorry but no. If you're going to call out people like this I'll gladly call you on that. I literally said we and our. I... I used those words. Like... mutual. Both.
But I'll give you the last word if that's what you're looking for? Say whatever you want and I promise it'll go unchallenged. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
|
| 104. |
Re: Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
Jan 8, 2020, 16:03 |
Korrd |
|
|
Dacron wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 15:13:
Okay then we are both in agreement you said Blue did not care enough about the truth then (as was said,). Why you so emotional over it and dancing like you did not day that ? We're not in agreement because I didn't say that. And now you're being childish. You keep fabricating claims and insisting I made them while accusing me of being emotional. Remember that word projection?
Please note that this is exactly the kind of dishonesty I was taking Crytek to task for.
Dacron wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 15:13:
Your account (and how it acts like other pro SC accounts...) is here for that though. Defense of SC/CiG. It's more defense of reason, but I understand now that you're not willing or able to assess this subject objectively.
Dacron wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 15:13:
You're the type to try and affiliate Blue with "alternative facts" I invoked "alternative facts" in reference to Crytek's claims.
Dacron wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 15:13:
saying someone doesn't care about the truth as they aren't emotionally invested in this video game like you are. Again, that's not what I said. I suggested he might not be invested in the subject. Please work on your reading comprehension because having your own argument misstated repeatedly is honestly a bit frustrating.
I suggest we let this go. There's clearly no middle ground to be reached as our positions are logically incompatible and we're already going in circles trying to establish a common perspective of reality. I appreciate that you took the time to participate even if it was ultimately fruitless. Maybe we'll have better luck next time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > EA Patents Direct Character Customization |
|
| 10. |
Re: EA Patents Direct Character Customization |
Jan 8, 2020, 14:33 |
Korrd |
|
|
It's shit like this that demonstrates how laughably broken our patent system can be. This isn't even a novel concept. Hell, I modified Mario's face in SM64 by direct manipulation. Granted, his face bounced back to normal when you let go of it, but still: you didn't do it first, EA.
Patenting a method for something like this--be it typing in a number, moving a slider, or direct manipulation--is silly and hopefully a court will eventually rule as such.
Maybe if the character was represented by an actual genome and you modified it by changing sequences of DNA...  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
|
| 101. |
Re: Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
Jan 8, 2020, 13:51 |
Korrd |
|
|
Dacron wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 13:17:
Oh my that's cute. You can argue the semantics of it all you like. They both say the same thing. That Blue did not care enough about the truth. Dacron wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 13:17:
Ah yes, the actual facts. The fact that you literally said Blue did not care for the truth ISN'T in fact accusing him of not caring. Korrd wrote on Jan 7, 2020, 14:54:
Maybe I'm wrong and Blue doesn't care enough about the subject to remember those earlier details, and that's understandable I'm sorry you're having such a hard time with this. I truly am. But it's not semantics. You even quoted the sentence in question, where I clearly state my position. I'm just not sure how you can argue with how words work.
Dacron wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 13:17:
Continue in your stalwart defense of SC/CiG, it's enjoyable to watch the guys ONLY comment on this [...] then act/pretend if they aren't so biased they just lie to support it. You maybe didn't notice, but it's not SC/CIG I've been defending all this time. Your failure to grasp even that tells me your ability to be objective and rational is inordinately compromised. And I explained why my post history is so SC/CIG-heavy and I make no apology for it. You can fabricate other explanations, but that says more about you than it does me.
Dacron wrote on Jan 8, 2020, 13:17:
Mind you, you're the type to cry to a site operator directly in a thread as opposed to provide the material to him to post so it seems an argument is all you were after. I'm the type who tries to have a dialogue with other readers when I feel the need. I admit I expected a more equitable one than I got, but the attempt was earnest. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Overwatch 2 This Year? |
|
| 5. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Jan 8, 2020, 13:30 |
Korrd |
|
|
I hope so. I've enjoyed the PvE missions Overwatch has had during events, but wished they had more depth. OW2 seems like it'll be exactly what I'm looking for.
I'm still confused, though, because how they've described it tying in to OW1 (same PVP content, cross-play, etc.) makes it sound more like an expansion--the addition of a new game mode, really--than a full-fledged standalone product that I'm sure will have a corresponding price tag. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
|
| 98. |
Re: Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
Jan 8, 2020, 11:54 |
Korrd |
|
|
Dacron wrote on Jan 7, 2020, 22:25:
You can lie to yourself all you want. You're a SC/CiG fanatic. The proof is in the pudding dear.
You claimed the site owner did not care enough about SC to post the truth (which he did, as explained by himself in this thread.). You can try to white wash it any way you'd like. It doesn't change your fanatical denial of the truth. Talk in circles all you want. No, dear, I'm afraid that's not logically sound.
I didn't accuse Blue of not caring about the truth; I said maybe he doesn't care enough about the story to remember the past details and use them to contradict new claims. There's kind of a big difference and I don't believe for a second that you actually missed it. Hey, I listened to someone speak the other day about something I wasn't interested in and now don't recall the details, but it's not an insult to me to point that out nor an insult to Blue just to propose that a similar thing might have happened. Being perpetually offended about imagined slights serves no purpose and I suggest you get over it and move on.
As for my defense of actual facts in the face of falsehoods, it doesn't suggest fanaticism toward SC or CIG, nor even a bias against Crytek (interesting that you've never once proposed that); I've argued about accurate representation of facts on a diverse range of subjects, many of which I wasn't deeply invested in. You either care about the truth all the time... or you don't actually care about the truth. One doesn't need to be a zealot for a particular cause or entity (or biased against their counterpart) to care that details about those things be proliferated accurately and fairly. That seems like a clear logical fallacy to me.
Voodoo's mention of projection is looking more and more likely in this case...
This comment was edited on Jan 8, 2020, 13:07. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
|
| 93. |
Re: Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
Jan 7, 2020, 19:56 |
Korrd |
|
|
Dacron wrote on Jan 7, 2020, 16:58:
No, it is piling on when you both are upset he posted something verbatim and continued to hound him for it. And because of that you decide to insult him as well. What the actual fuck? I suggested Blue might not remember past details of the CIG/Crytek story--and thus be unable to directly refute bogus claims on the fly--and that constitutes an insult in your mind? Are you really so thin-skinned or just all about the whiteknighting? As I said, he might not have remembered because the details weren't important to him; i.e., he was just reporting a story and happened to not read/remember the documents in question. It wasn't an accusation; it's an understandable position to be in when your job is to post dozens or even hundreds of stories a week. I cannot imagine why you think that's an insult.
Dacron wrote on Jan 7, 2020, 16:58:
Your entire reason for being here is clear. Now you claim the site owner doesn't care as he isn't fanatical about this pipe dream like you. I've stated my reason for commenting here, so I should hope it's clear. Read my previous posts if you need a refresher. I think--or at least hope--you know what I meant by the above "insult" and are just playing the offense card. And lastly, I am not a fanatic--about anything.
Let me know if there's anything else you need explained in greater detail. I can use smaller words if needed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
|
| 80. |
Re: Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
Jan 7, 2020, 14:54 |
Korrd |
|
|
Dacron wrote on Jan 7, 2020, 13:31:
You and Steve piled on Blue for posting an article, because it didn't contain what YOU guys wanted from a DIFFERENT article that wasn't submitted. Two people raising concerns is hardly piling on. And it seems to me that on a topic as frequently discussed as this lawsuit, that expecting a basic understanding of the details from previous posts (that did appear on Blue's) to persist isn't exactly unreasonable. Maybe I'm wrong and Blue doesn't care enough about the subject to remember those earlier details, and that's understandable--memory tends to work that way--but I do wish that familiarity persisted and allowed for calling out of falsehoods when they inevitably appear. I mean, the quote that CIG "was forced to confirm [...] that no such switch had taken place" is literally a lie, but if anyone points that out in comments--after more susceptible readers have accepted it as fact based on the posting--they're labeled fanboys or worse.
I readily admit--again--that I may be asking too much and that even cursory fact-checking just isn't reasonable to expect; all I can do is express my concern (see: frustration) and hope for the best. Blue's has been my chief source of game news for many years and I don't expect that to change; I just wish we could head off the shitstorm that is every CIG/Crytek post. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
|
| 69. |
Re: Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
Jan 7, 2020, 13:20 |
Korrd |
|
|
Dacron wrote on Jan 7, 2020, 12:34:
We're saying that's the ONLY reason some are here, and will lie to try and avoid that fact. As Voodoo already pointed out, there's nothing wrong with that. If someone's motivated to post, even including creating an account to do so, because of the insane amount of misinformation and zealotry in every Star Citizen thread, then who are you to say their opinions aren't valid? There's a person behind every new account whose opinion is equally as valid as yours--moreso, I'd argue, if theirs is grounded in objective reality.
Take a look at my own post history over the past eight years. Notice how most are about Star Citizen? That's not because it's the topic I'm most interested in, but because of all the unfounded claims and outright lies that parade as "facts" in these threads. I actually care about things like skepticism and truth and rationality and it pisses me off to no end when I see people parroting this garbage without doing the bare minimum of fact-checking. I try to avoid SC threads for that reason, but sometimes curiosity gets the better of me. That's when you see those strings of posts periodically in my history.
I promise you, I'd much rather rational discourse was the norm so I could happily not feel the need to comment. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
|
| 51. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Jan 6, 2020, 09:37 |
Korrd |
|
|
eRe4s3r wrote on Jan 6, 2020, 00:45:
But I always feel like people confuse news sites and news aggregators and don't understand that 1 is not like the other. Except that Blue's isn't merely an aggregator; there's a human element in the blurb of every post that's often editorial in nature. We seem to disagree on what these words mean, but we're wandering ever further afield of the topic and should perhaps just agree to disagree on definitions and values.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
|
| 47. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Jan 5, 2020, 21:15 |
Korrd |
|
|
Orogogus wrote on Jan 5, 2020, 20:16:
Korrd wrote on Jan 5, 2020, 17:52:
I think his objection, unkindly phrased though it was, is that he feels news outlets should not just report claims, but point out when those claims are entirely contrary to reality.
As someone who doesn't typically jump into SC threads, I think this point of view is terrible -- everyone who isn't with you is against you. [...] But if you think sites shouldn't be allowed to report the actual court filings without editorializing, then I see you as the slanted bad guy. If advocating for responsible reporting makes me the bad guy then I'll wear that with pride. When reporting on a claim that is a known and easily demonstrable lie, I don't feel it's too much to ask that it be pointed out as such. It's the difference between simply quoting a ridiculous wind power claim and prefacing it with "So-and-so claimed" it was true. In this SC story at least Blue included the text "Word is:", not that it stopped the regulars from eating it up as fact.
Maybe you're right. Maybe I'm the bad guy and it's unreasonable to want bullshit claims to be called out, but after witnessing the advent of alternative facts I find myself wishing for a sea change in how we relay information, even when it concerns something as trivial as a video game. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Crytek's Star Citizen Lawsuit Follow-up |
|
| 43. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Jan 5, 2020, 17:52 |
Korrd |
|
|
Blue wrote on Jan 5, 2020, 14:08:
But if you've been here that long you should know already that I pride myself on being a straight shooter, and should understand why I bristle at your implications. I think his objection, unkindly phrased though it was, is that he feels news outlets should not just report claims, but point out when those claims are entirely contrary to reality. Seeing the quoted text in a reported story lends the impression of truth; here, Crytek's claim is objectively false--laughably so--yet we can clearly see the impact of such reporting in the comments of every such story accepting deceptive claims as truth.
Imagine seeing a story posted with a quote from Trump claiming that wind power kills more birds each year than all other causes combined and most of the comments were of readers reflecting on this newfound "fact" as though it were accurate. More knowledgeable readers would likely be incensed at the proliferation of falsehoods, but are likely be labeled zealots or imbeciles for pointing out that the claim is a bald-faced lie. 
Who knew a game could be as contentious and divisive as climate change, vaccination, or the shape of the Earth? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > etc. |
|
| 1. |
Re: etc. |
Aug 7, 2019, 16:48 |
Korrd |
|
|
| If you played this or similar games on NES--or you just enjoy platformers--I absolutely recommend picking it up, especially since it's under $4 until tomorrow. I'm really quite pissed it's getting pulled. If you could still store gift copies in Steam inventory I'd happily stockpile a bunch. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
39 Comments. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older > |
|
Twitter
