Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Germany 08/31
Chicago, IL USA, IL 10/19

Regularly scheduled events

User information for Andyy Clitheroe

Real Name Andyy Clitheroe   
Search for:
 
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
 
 
 
Nickname Peeeling
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
Description
Homepage http://
Signed On Jan 10, 2012, 21:40
Total Comments 105 (Novice)
User ID 57293
 
User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Older >


News Comments > Valve's Unannounced Top Secret Games
30. Re: Valve's Unannounced Top Secret Games May 22, 2018, 17:12 Peeeling
 
CJ_Parker wrote on May 22, 2018, 16:17:
jdreyer wrote on May 22, 2018, 14:08:
Valve's Unannounced Top Secret Games

Just had a terrible thought:

Half-Live: Battle Royale

You mean you had a REALISTIC thought?

I mean, seriously, does anyone really believe a new HL would even have a single player campaign? Like really really?

LLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLL

Yes. And if you thought about it for a moment, you'd believe it too. Valve is not publicly traded. They have plenty of money. If for some random reason they decided to make a BR game, why would they attach the HL brand to it?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
11. Re: Op Ed Mar 12, 2018, 11:53 Peeeling
 
"Many gamers are right wing" > links to article where a nazi has 300 friends on a platform with 65,000,000 monthly users.

I don't think that word means what you think it does.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Saturday Mobilization
1. Re: Saturday Mobilization Jan 29, 2018, 06:08 Peeeling
 
Here's a shot of the box the Clips comes in.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > CIG Responds to Crytek
24. Re: CIG Responds to Crytek Jan 29, 2018, 05:15 Peeeling
 
Might just be me, but Crytek's interpretation of 'exclusively' doesn't seem all that absurd. Discounting the license fee in exchange for a promise to use their engine and no other for a specific title sounds like a pretty reasonable mutual back-scratching arrangement. CIG got the discount - if they subsequently want to back out of the deal they should at least have offered to buy out the contract.

I've no idea what legal weight any of this carries, but something smells funky here. How can you say "It's not even Cryengine any more; we call it Star Engine", and then turn around and port the whole shebang to Lumberyard, which IS Cryengine in all but name, virtually overnight? I'm not a lawyer but I am a coder, and those are not compatible concepts.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Crytek Suing Cloud Imperium
29. Re: Crytek Suing Cloud Imperium Dec 14, 2017, 09:08 Peeeling
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Dec 13, 2017, 23:12:
Huh, isn't Lumberyard based on Cryengine after Amazon bought the engine after Crytek folded? I am confused.

And that aside, Crytek still exists? Good for them I guess. But what the actual fuck is this lawsuit? CIG uses Lumberyard not CryEngine, and even if they used CryEngine this isn't "really" CryEngine anymore after 90% of the systems had been replaced....

I would actually be really shocked if this lawsuit went anywhere. Whoever made that original engine contract must have been a fucking idiot if they did actually sign a "we don't change engine" clause.

Not really. According to the suit, CIG negotiated a significant discount from the usual licensing rate by promising to exclusively use Cryengine, promising to prominently feature Crytek copyright notices on launch, and promising to collaborate with Crytek by back-propagating bug-fixes and optimisations to Crytek. The deal was, essentially: you get to use our engine as a launchpad at knockdown rates, in exchange for which we are along for the ride PR-wise and tech-wise.

In other news: Nacho stocks soar as world popcorn shortage drives snackers elsewhere.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
15. Re: Morning Tech Bits Dec 11, 2017, 05:18 Peeeling
 
RedEye9 wrote on Dec 9, 2017, 16:15:
jdreyer wrote on Dec 9, 2017, 15:32:
Mordecai Walfish wrote on Dec 9, 2017, 15:16:
That optical illusion is "breaking their brains"?

Its really fucking simple. the lines are shaded differently in the alternating rows, and when the split between the shades is at the apex of the curve, the lines appear straighter than the ones that are not split on the apex of the curves. The shaded sections being in the straighter areas instead of the curved areas gives the illusion. Took all of 5 seconds to realize whats going on there.. not very "brain breaking", but I guess it's just a clickbait headline.

Not all brains are created equal.

Screw the cool optical illusion, this is the real thing to read on digg http://digg.com/2017/ajit-pai-ron-swanson-net-neutrality

The point wasn't that they look different, it's that they ONLY look different when viewed against a grey background, not a white or black background.

Personally I think it happens because against the mid-grey background the 'sharp' lines look as though they could be the highlights and shadows of an embossing, and because they're uniformly light and dark with a hard transition, that tells our brain "even brightness = straight line = hard angles"
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Out of the Blue
26. Re: Out of the Blue Nov 24, 2017, 06:37 Peeeling
 
RedEye9 wrote on Nov 23, 2017, 11:54:
Darwin aoproves of the flat earthers rocket launch.

"Rocket Launch will prove California man flat, Earth says."
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
4. Re: Evening Metaverse Nov 2, 2017, 09:50 Peeeling
 
Personally, I don't think the problem is social media dividing us. Quite the opposite: the problem is social media making it possible for anyone, however fringe or extreme or unpleasant or counterfactual their views, to feel part of a large and supportive community - even to believe they are part of a 'silent majority'. It has become practically impossible for mainstream society to effectively ostracize members who undermine its values.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Bank Loan Follow-up
69. Re: Star Citizen Bank Loan Follow-up Jun 27, 2017, 05:09 Peeeling
 
CJ_Parker wrote on Jun 26, 2017, 13:19:

Brexit. The pound has crashed pretty hard in the last few years. When SC development started in the UK in 2013, you'd get about $1.6 for your £1. Now you are only getting about $1.27.

No... in 2013 paying a UK dev £1 COST $1.6, and now it only costs $1.27.
The majority of CIG staff is in Manchester at Foundry 42. Development has become a lot more expensive for CIG just because of currency shenanigans.

No, it has got cheaper. Most of their income is in $ and Euros, and their expenditure is in UK£. The pound has become cheaper to buy with $ and Euros, ergo development expenses have fallen relative to the value of income.

The dev who gets a salary of £3,000 only cost CIG $1,764 in mid 2014 when the $ reached its high against the £ and today the same dev eats up $2,362.

Um. No. That's entirely backwards. A salary of £3000 at an exchange rate of $1.6/£1 would have been $4800. Now it's $3810.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Bank Loan Follow-up
12. Re: Star Citizen Bank Loan Follow-up Jun 26, 2017, 11:30 Peeeling
 
Correct me if I'm wrong:

The UK government pays out tax credit rebates every year, and does so in UK£. This has been going on for a while now, so that money is turning up already (even though it's 'from' a year or so back).

Securing a loan against that rebate is a way to get at next year's money now. The rebates are ALREADY IN UK£, so... eh? And it's a one-time trick: next year they'll either get zero rebate OR they'll have to take out a second loan as an advance against the NEXT year's rebate.

The only way this helps avoid currency conversion is if the UK studios need extra money, urgently, and they don't want to transfer money into the country just yet. But it's a one-time trick, so unless the need for extra funds subsides, that transfer has to happen next year anyway.

So why don't they want to transfer extra money into the country just yet? I can think of one pretty obvious reason, but maybe you can all think of another.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > More on the Star Citizen Roadmap
10. Re: More on the Star Citizen Roadmap Apr 16, 2017, 15:45 Peeeling
 
The Half Elf wrote on Apr 16, 2017, 13:32:
Ok I have to admit I am having some fun in the Free Fly weekend (thank god for a 1070 video card). But a tutorial would be so much better then spewing out more shit from Roberts mouth.


And stop with the fucking feature creep and just finish the fucking game.

Feature creep IS the game. That's what everyone's paying to play.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Quake Champions Trailer
14. Re: Quake Champions Trailer Apr 6, 2017, 08:55 Peeeling
 
To me it just... doesn't look very nice. The quad damage powerup looks like someone added it to Unity without a texture. The yellow... hourglasses? look awful. I've been playing that exact level in Quake Live with my daughter recently, and I honestly think the old one looks better. What's going on?  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Swapping DX12 for Vulkan
49. Re: Star Citizen Swapping DX12 for Vulkan Mar 20, 2017, 07:32 Peeeling
 
Like they said, it's mostly about re-engineering the pipeline feeding the API, not the API itself (not when talking about DX12/Vulkan, anyway). So they're probably not taking any significant hit from this, and ditching DX11/OGL will allow them to focus on optimising for a single target. All in all, it's a better decision than pursuing DX12 would have been.

On the other hand, just because you've picked the best way to do something doesn't necessarily make doing it AT ALL a good idea.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Op Ed
3. Re: Op Ed Feb 14, 2017, 09:45 Peeeling
 
Tell me again about how one of the richest corporations in the industry is doing it wrong.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Engine Switch Follow-up
64. Re: Star Citizen Engine Switch Follow-up Dec 30, 2016, 21:00 Peeeling
 
I was intrigued by 'object containers' so I checked it out. Major deja-vu.

Way back, I recall reading about the incredible FIDELITY of the thruster model. The actual placement of the thrusters, the actual power fed to them, it was all accurately simulated. And of course nobody could actually control such a system manually so on top of this marvellous fidelity they introduced a bunch of simulated abstraction layers. And the sum of these parts? Pretty underwhelming.

Then there's the unified animation system, that proved so jarring they had to add a 'vision stabilisation' layer which - contrary to what some here continue to parrot - necessarily re-separates your 3rd person head from your 1st person view.

Now we have another system for handling cargo, and yet again FIDELITY has won out over common sense. So unless every one of their players enjoys playing Tetris to load and unload their ships, I'm calling it now: a simulated on-board cargo computer that will arrange everything so all you have to care about is "Cargo: 11/20 full".
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Engine Switch Follow-up
59. Re: Star Citizen Engine Switch Follow-up Dec 27, 2016, 09:57 Peeeling
 
Given that there's only so much you can do in 'a day or so', I'm going to venture the following:

2.6 now pulls in a bunch of lumberyard-specific code, but the modules themselves make no significant additional usage of it. No doubt some of the network layer has changed, but what is being communicated under what circumstances, and how lag/prediction/missed packets etc are being dealt with at a high level almost certainly hasn't. So this doesn't constitute the 'new netcode', I reckon.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Video
83. Re: Star Citizen Video Dec 21, 2016, 11:13 Peeeling
 
It's not so much about WHAT'S being combined, as HOW.

Even when you're breaking new ground, it's possible to make good decisions about how you're going to approach it. CR managed to orchestrate a perfect storm of fail:

Step 1: Pick an engine that's fundamentally unfit for purpose.
Step 2: Before having the slightest clue what an overarching technology framework might look like for this kind of game world, or even the most rudimentary spec, ramp up production across several studios on gameplay 'modules', final-quality ship models and textures. For the layman, this is roughly equivalent to asking different people in different countries to make different but interlocking parts of a LEGO model without first defining what the model is supposed to look like or indeed what LEGO is.
Step 3: Relentlessly stir and churn the ensuing cacophony with impulsive feature-creep, demands for throw-away demos and obsessive micro-management.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Video
80. Re: Star Citizen Video Dec 20, 2016, 16:27 Peeeling
 
RedEye9 wrote on Dec 20, 2016, 11:28:
Peeeling wrote on Dec 20, 2016, 11:10:
I don't think those who were sold on the hype deserve abuse. For the most part it's been very good hype. However I think apologists who try to gloss over the failure to deliver on promises, and who try to claim - AFAIK with zero industry experience - that this is typical AAA development are doing everyone a disservice at this point.
In the history of gaming there has never been an undertaking as large as this with such a big all encompassing scope.

Not to mention it has fairly open development with the community and is crowd funded.

Some. if not most, of this is uncharted territory.

That's probably the most pernicious fallacy concerning SC.

Right across the hall we have Elite:Dangerous. What's the 'scope' or 'ambition' of that game? Do you think it's somehow intrinsically limited compared to SC - that there's something planned for SC that simply could not be introduced to E:D because of the way the latter has been developed?

Of course not! In fact, I guarantee that if CIG tossed their engine in the garbage right now, bought out E:D and ported the SC ship assets, you would be playing the game promised in the Kickstarter within 12 months. Maybe six.

SC's glacial progress and missed deadlines are NOT a natural and inevitable consequence of project scope. They are a natural and inevitable consequence of poor decision-making, poor planning and impulsive feature-creep. It's what happens when you simply don't understand the reality of what you're attempting and thus cannot adequately prepare for it.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Video
74. Re: Star Citizen Video Dec 20, 2016, 11:10 Peeeling
 
I don't think those who were sold on the hype deserve abuse. For the most part it's been very good hype. However I think apologists who try to gloss over the failure to deliver on promises, and who try to claim - AFAIK with zero industry experience - that this is typical AAA development are doing everyone a disservice at this point.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
News Comments > Star Citizen Video
71. Re: Star Citizen Video Dec 20, 2016, 06:08 Peeeling
 
I'm obviously talking about the fidelity of content released and upcoming content shown off (i.e. the procedurally generated planets). The fidelity is far in excess of anything originally envisioned.

Really?

In any case, 'overdeliver' is just wrong. To overdeliver you have to exceed expectations, and since everyone expected to be playing S42 in 2014 it's no longer possible to 'overdeliver' that product.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
105 Comments. 6 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo