Luke wrote on Jan 4, 2014, 16:46:
what makes it tick ?

Peps lazyness they don't want to move there ass out to the stores and buy there games ,

I really don't think it's laziness. I've always disliked having boxes and boxes of games to store and/or throw away. Plus not having to fish out a disc to play a game is a nicer alternative; no need to go searching for no-CD cracks either.

Ever since game publishers stopped putting nice manuals and extras in the boxes, there's never been any real point in owning a physical copy.

Sorry to hear about your dog. My buddy (a yellow Lab) is turning 11 in February and thankfully is doing well, but I know that he probably only has another two or three good years left. It really sucks because dogs give you everything they have and expect very little from you in return; they just want to be with you and have your praise. I've experienced three dogs passing over the years, my dad's and two of my mom's that I grew up with, but never my own. It's sad when it happens but you have to remember the great times you shared with them.

Most dedicated PC games were playing to a niche audience, and those that weren't would see their sales plundered by piracy.

I had to stop reading after that sentence. So mainstream PC titles were pirated to the point of hurting sales and yet the same titles pirated on consoles had no impact? Give me a break! Furthermore, I'd love to see some facts/numbers to back up this statement.

Sensationalized tripe as usual...

Agent.X7 wrote on Sep 13, 2013, 12:17:
What the hell are you talking about? You passed on an awesome game because you thought it looked better on the 360? It looks pretty much the same on both systems.

The PS3 lagged behind a bit in performance during busy scenes while rendering everything at a lower resolution (1152x640 after doing a quick search.) Distant objects were quicker to disappear and pop-in, which really messes with the overall immersion factor (at least for me.)

I guess for me it wasn't so much that I wasn't willing to put up with lower quality of the PS3 version as much as I was hoping Rockstar would eventually release a PC version. By the time it became clear this was not going to happen, I no longer had a burning desire to play the game.

Those small visual differences between the PS3 and XBox releases is one of the reasons I never picked up (and missed out on) Red Dead Redemption. The PS3 version looked noticeably inferior to the XBox version...though admittedly LA Noire looked pretty good on it.

It seems like Sony really did an awesome job designing the PS4.

Sounds like a real stinker...

Mad Max RW wrote on May 16, 2013, 20:39:
I'm a little confused. Is this not at all connected to the Autoduel game property from the 80s? Did they acquire the IP?

This is exactly what I was thinking too! I used to play Autoduel and Car Wars table top games as a kid (including expansions like Boat Wars and Aeroduel.) Paying homage to I76? How about paying homage to the original Autoduel PC game?!

I'm still confused as to whether they bought the rights to use the Autoduel name or not...they must have...

JohnnyRotten wrote on Mar 11, 2013, 20:53:
Maybe the server is written on a *nix server? That would throw a wrinkle in things.

...and if retargeting for a Windows OS isn't possible, then you can just use a *nix image and one of the free VM players.

EA just doesn't want to lose control. After doing a bit more reading it does seem that the game can continue on with simulating city life for a period of time after losing connection to EA's servers. So is it just the social aspects and economy/interaction between other cities that is being simulated on the server?

While I agree that it wouldn't be a trivial fix, I highly doubt the server-side code is written in anything other than C/C++, C#, or Java. I haven't bought the game yet, so I haven't been able to do any digging first-hand but I'd be surprised if the server-side processes are anything special or esoteric.

While I don't think it would be trivial for EA/Maxis to provide the server-side portion of the game to customers, it certainly *should* be possible with a bit of work.

I have no idea what they are using for a backing store on the server-side for per-user instance data (I thought it was something like Amazon S3) but if the programmers followed well established coding patterns and practices, it wouldn't be too difficult for them to swap out the backing store, assuming no reliance on platform/infrastructure-specific APIs or features (e.g. Amazon S3/EC2, etc.) Things like achievements and other social metrics might not transfer over as easily but, with a bit of work, there should be no reason that EA couldn't allow customers to setup their own private dedicated servers (minus certain features.) The game client would simply connect to the local server instance instead of using EA's servers.

Hell, it may even be as simple as providing the server files with the disclaimer that they must be hosted on Amazon's platform due to reliance on specific features (or whatever PaaS/IaaS vendor EA has gone with.)

Yes, modifying the server-files to support private hosting by customers would require an investment from EA/Maxis but after the less than stellar launch and the apparent success (sales-wise) of the game, they could at least do this as a show of good faith. They could even wait a year before releasing the modified server files, which would probably generate an additional round of increased sales while still discouraging pirating during the initial release period.

The again, EA has no need to do this because gamers clearly don't have a problem with the always on requirement or complete dependence on the availability of EA's servers. Gamers seem quite happy to take one up the rear. If gamers did care, they wouldn't have opened their wallets. Sometimes gamers are their own worst enemy.

nin wrote on Feb 24, 2013, 18:46:
Just going by the screenshots, it almost looks like a FTL ripoff.

Just as FTL could be called a "ripoff" of the board game Battlestations. FTL was also likely influenced by video games like SunDog: Frozen Legacy and Starflight as well.

Redmask wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 23:48:
I looked up some names here on Steam using the public profile search, what I consider the biggest defenders of the game on the forums here played it less than 12 hours online and haven't touched it in days. I doubt they would admit it but I don't think there is much to the games multiplayer.

That's my other concern. Once the novelty wears off, how hard is it going to be to find a solid MP session. Argh. This game had SO much potential: set pieces from possibly one of the best sci-fi/action movie sequels ever, the original actors voicing their characters, awesome enemies, blah. Why can't someone make a solid Aliens game?!

I've been on the fence with Colonial Marines. After watching a ton of walkthroughs, I can see some of the things people are complaining about but, and perhaps it's just me, the multiplayer seems pretty solid. Even with the lack of dedicated servers, it still seems like there could be worse ways to kill a spare hour or two.

I love the Aliens franchise and tolerated the later AvP games (with exception of the last one which was horrid) just to kill some xenos; the first two AvP games were fun. The chance to go back to LV426 and creep around Hadley's Hope with no Predators to mess up the game, just seems irresistable. Argh...

So, is Colonial Marines really THAT bad? Is multiplayer fun at all on the PC?

Random Robotech/Macross reference in there. This brings back so many memories of when Valve used to release SP games. Still waiting for HL3...

Whatever possessed you to email a pic of your butt to your friend?

It must be late because I read "erects" and "Lego for adults" and was scared to click the link, but after doing so, felt oddly disappointed lol.

Bhruic wrote on Oct 22, 2012, 03:22:

I do live in Canada, and I have a nice 25/10 connection. You, on the other hand, are getting ripped off because apparently you haven't looked at the alternatives. I dunno if you can get faster - probably not - but you could certainly get cheaper. Check out 3rd party ISPs like Teksavvy, you'll be paying a lot less for your 6/0.8.

Teksavvy is just leasing off of Bell's lines anyways and actually provides worse support, according to all the reviews lately. If there is a network problem they have to wait for mother Bell to fix it, and it is no different going with their cable solution which is operated by Rogers. I don't have time to mess around with tech support on the phone for hours on end.

I should have mentioned that Bell dings me $70/mo because I'm grandfathered into their old High Speed Internet unlimited plan. So they are essentially charging me $25 overuse upfront per month. FIBE isn't even offered in our area, which is weird. Teksavvy also doesn't offer 25/10 here (neither does Rogers.)

Try living in Canada...

I live in a recently built subdivision (~5 years old) that is just north (~2 km) of a reasonably sized city (122K+) and I'm stuck with DSL (Bell) at *6* Mbps down/1Mbps up. Rogers (cable), which is faster, has serious issues with bandwidth during peak hours and throttles torrents (80kbps). Also Rogers limits all of their plans, except their "Ultimate" package (which is $122/mo) to *1* Mbps. Even their $70mo plan is limited to *1*Mbps. Bell charges me almost $70/mo for 6Mbps.

Now THAT is called being ripped off...

The problem is that evolution generally occurs at a relatively slow pace unlike the explosive rate at which technology and its byproducts (e.g. social media/texting, internet, etc) have evolved. I don't think we're keeping up.

As a software developer/analyst who has been exposed to the internet for about 22 years (starting with BBSes and Trumpet WinSOCK), I've recently noticed a slight decrease in my ability to process information as I attempt to keep pace with an ever changing industry. I attribute this to information overload as I find myself constantly bouncing between web pages, checking email, catching up on tech blogs, etc.

I abhor social media sites like Facebook and Twitter, generally avoiding them like the plague, but the constant multitasking required by my daily grind is definitely having an effect on how I process and retain information. Honestly, due to the sheer volume of information that I have to read, I continually catch myself skipping paragraphs in articles, probably in a subconcious and futile attempt to maximize my time. I also find that I'm more easily distracted by related links in tech/coding articles, which link to even more information. This obviously doesn't always yield the best results and I never used to be this way.

As someone mentioned below, two or three weeks of vacation, including reduced or at least more focused use of the internet, has my mind feeling sharper and better able to process and retain what I'm reading.

While I'm not one to be an alarmist, both my wife and I have agreed to strictly limit our young daughter's exposure to TV and computers. She will also never have a smart phone with texting capabilities; I see too many kids walking around like zombies with their eyes glued to their phones as they traverse busy intersections without nary a concern for cars or other pedestrians. There is no need for that sort of constant connectivity to friends and media.

The internet is a vast source of information but as the article states, I think we're starting to see some of the potential side-effects of always being plugged into and bombarded by information.

NKD wrote on Jul 23, 2012, 01:57:

Dev wrote on Jul 23, 2012, 01:31:

Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Jul 23, 2012, 01:23:

Dev wrote on Jul 23, 2012, 00:25:

Kajetan wrote on Jul 22, 2012, 16:07:

Dev wrote on Jul 22, 2012, 15:51:
That last line is just giving ammo to his opponent.

What ammo?

Go read that last line in blues blurb again. You don't think someone could argue thats defamatory in court?

I don't see anything there that could be considered defamation (specifically libel). Shouldn't be a problem for him.

He's implying that they have a trivial patent (which is probably true) and saying they are evil (which also might be true), but it will be hard to prove they sacrifice goats.

As you said, subjective opinions are not grounds for defamation. Regarding the goats... Statements that are absurd or used as simple insults typically don't rise to the level of defamation. If I say you're a space alien from Planet X no reasonable person is likely to believe me and no damage is done to your reputation. (Proving damage is part of a defamation suit).

Furthermore, if people actually read the quote, Notch is suggesting that software patents are evil, not the company bringing the lawsuit. We can infer that he might be saying companies that patent software algorithms or ideas are, by extension, evil as well, but that's not what he actually wrote. At least that is how I read it; he's saying the very idea of patenting software is wrong.

NKD wrote on Jul 3, 2012, 16:13:
Let's boil this down to its simplest form. You go to buy a relatively new game on Steam, there are two buttons:

New: $60
Used: $45

Who the fuck is gonna press New?

Yes but there will be a limited supply of "used" licenses, so that "Used" button might not always be available. You still have a 1:1 relationship between number of licenses and number of license holders.

I'd have no problem with publishers providing first-time purchasers of a license with additional extras, within reason (e.g. extra maps, "behind the scenes" videos, etc), that will not be available to second hand owners. That way there would still be an incentive to buy a new license.