Darks wrote on Dec 14, 2017, 10:23:

Prez wrote on Dec 14, 2017, 09:29:
Wow Playerunknown seems to have less and less of a clue every time he opens his mouth.

Yea, right prez. Thats why hes sold over 20 million copies of his game. I guess he has no fucking clue right!!!

If money/business success was a measure of intelligence, Trump would be the founder of MENSA. Your move.

In fact, business success is only an indicator that you might be knowledgeable about how to succeed in business. Might...

I must be getting old. I can't even tell what is happening, what with all the rainbow-colored effects flashing across the screen at near epilepsy-inducing frequency. Why would I want to play a game where I can't even see the game?

Damn millennials and their ADHD attention spans. Now get off my lawn!

Beamer wrote on Nov 21, 2017, 18:03:
Want to reiterate, in general, that I'm not arguing that I want games to be more expensive (and no one seems to think I am, but that surprises me.)

I just feel like we're on borrowed time with this pricing and recommending people enjoy it. It's one of those times where you realize you're kind of getting away with something and it won't last.

Nah. Games are a luxury good. This is why the price for them is less, comparatively, than in the past. There is far more competition for the entertainment dollar than ever before. Beyond a certain price-point, consumers will find another good they feel is more economical and stop buying games. This is the reason for "collector's editions," etc. Gamers expect additional content to justify expenses beyond the standard $60 they pay (in the US).

In fact, game prices are not going to go up for the foreseeable future. At the most, when the economics no longer support a "AAA" game at $60, you will see the death of the "AAA" game before you see the increase in standard price.

AAA game companies are still making gigantic profits from the $60 price points. But they'd already charge you $100 a game if they thought you'd buy it. If you won't buy it at $60, they'll either start selling it at $40, or they'll stop making it. This is why games go on sale way more often today than in the past.

All this talk of game value structure borders on economic illiteracy. Game prices will be the maximum the market will bear. And if they can nickle and dime you with loot boxes, too, they will...

Cutter wrote on Nov 17, 2017, 17:27:

jacobvandy wrote on Nov 17, 2017, 14:10:
It's gonna be like Hunger Games, where all the plebs have nothing to do but live off the land or entertain the ultra rich.

No, actually it'll be more like Red October or the French Revolution with the elites getting their fucking heads cut off and the wealth redistributed to the people. I'd actually like to see that. Viva la Revolucion! Viva Che! Power to the People!

Yeah. Except the wealth never got redistributed to the "people," just to the new elites. Who then sent all of the people who helped them revolt to the guillotine next. Great plan, there...

Beamer wrote on Nov 12, 2017, 09:03:

NKD wrote on Nov 11, 2017, 13:58:
.

I don't know why so many people seem to think that you have to be convicted of a crime before people are allowed to think you're a piece of shit.

It generally seems to be self-identifying MRA weirdos who are afraid of innocently doing something they're latter being accused of being gross for. Which is what Louis is claiming happened, but saddened about his judgment, not that it was late found to be creepy.

It's pretty easy to not unintentionally do something others find creepy, but...

Tell that to George Takei. Ooops, narrative wrecked.

Darks wrote on Nov 1, 2017, 09:04:

Pigeon wrote on Nov 1, 2017, 08:34:

Luke wrote on Nov 1, 2017, 06:07:

NamecaF wrote on Nov 1, 2017, 00:16:
All this knee-jerk over-reaction and PC, social media bullshit is getting out of hand. Netflix have just lost a lot of respect with their handling of all this.

That's what happens when people have waaaaaay to much spare time

Flush men is the new black so followwww

So people not wanting to work with a child molester is out of control PC? The fact it happened years ago doesn't change what happened. It also means he got away with it for years, and it only came out now because an environment exists where the victim won't automatically be stiffled.

I dont condom any of this type of crap. but the real question is, why is this now just coming out? Thats what urks me to no end.

Whats the real motive behind this coming out so late and now?

Most likely he tried to extort Spacey for money and he refused. and didn't get the payout he wanted.

A couple of things. First, it's a snowball effect. People have known for decades about people like Weinstein and Spacey. The predatory behavior in Hollywood is legendary (Corey Feldman has been shouting from the rooftops for years about the way directors have been abusing young boys, ditto that for Rose McGowan and Weinstein). And the vast majority of the people who would normally focus the outrage haven't cared, because of the power, influence, and politics of the people doing it.

Then Harvey Weinstein's brother wants to eject Harvey from the company they founded, primarily because they hate each other and the company is tanking. A story that has been spiked 2 times earlier gets the green light (with leaked info) and Harvey is in the spotlight. You have real victims like Rose McGowan (who has been consistent in her allegations for years, but no one would listen) to back it up, and suddenly, now that his power is gone and he's no longer a gateway to stardom, Harvey gets in the crosshairs.

Here's where it gets interesting. Along with the obvious victims who have been vocal all along, you start to get the victims who were too afraid to talk. Everyone in Hollywood knows about Harvey and his sleaziness, so now the spotlight is on the other actresses who have worked with him. That's when you see the pile-on happen. What actress is going to say, "Of course I blew him for a part in his movies! Five minutes of discomfort have translated into a lifetime of wealth and fame that you couldn't dream of!"? All of the women who worked with him now have to position themselves on the side of "disturbed, but afraid to talk" as opposed to "willing to tickle his balls for fame." Thus the flood of accusations, as everyone wants to position themselves in the best light. And thus the normal holier-than-thou screechers (who were perfectly willing to ignore him so long as he was "their guy" ... see Clinton, Bill) now have the green light to condemn it all.

The problem with this kind of thing (for Hollywood) is that you can't direct an avalanche. As soon as the revelations start drawing news coverage, everyone who has been afraid to talk starts getting braver, and then it starts taking down the other pervs who are still profitable. Hence Kevin Spacey. And there will be more, because Hollywood is a cesspool. Wait until the pictures of Brian Singer (who is not shy about being photographed with boy-toys of questionable age) or the stars of Nickelodeon start appearing on the nightly news with stories of what they had to do at 14 or 16 to keep their jobs. Hopefully the coming flood will flush all of the human garbage out of Hollywood...

Beamer wrote on Oct 13, 2017, 19:31:

Redmask wrote on Oct 13, 2017, 18:56:

Beamer wrote on Oct 13, 2017, 16:31:

There are times that race matters. Being "color blind" is as bad as being racist, as it just enforces the status quo. Yeah, I know, you're saying I'm as bad as the racists and I'm saying you're as bad as the racists and it comes across as me echoing you, but I've seen your posting history here and, honestly, I'm pretty certain you prefer white people, so I'm done even talking to you and your horrible, unrealistic ideas that probably often strike you as "real" due to it being "race realism." At the very least you feel white people are the most persecuted in America and have it the hardest.

Sure why actually confront your own conflicting statements when you can vaguely dismiss him. We'll just all pretend you weren't a massive hypocrite.

What's conflicting? His post doesn't spell it out, and his posting history is full of white panic. The fact remains that being black in America leads to drastically different experiences. Is that right? No. Is it true? Yes. And if your company needs the perspective of black people, being all white won't help. Period.

Ironic ad hominem (a sure sign of defeat), coming from someone whose posting history is full of collectivist racialism. Dodge all you want, the only difference between your ideas and Stormfront is that they admit they are being racist. Your fart-sniffing airs of noblesse oblige just mask your internal certainty that the poor POCs out there need your protection. See how easy it is to assign motives to those you disagree with (the difference is that mine almost certainly hits closer to the mark)?

If you want to pursue cultural and/or experiencial diversity, then I'm all for it. When you simplistically (and racistly) assert that such diversity is simply a matter of skin color, then you have gone beyond the pale. Asians can't experience poverty? Hispanics can't experience urban blight and discrimination? White people can't know what it's like to be visible minorities? That's what you are asserting when you limit your hiring to black applicants based on your logic. If you are looking for bigotry, I'm sure there's a mirror nearby...

Beamer wrote on Oct 13, 2017, 15:31:
Yes, in general, being black makes you more likely to know how to appeal to black people and more likely to appeal to black people.

Beamer:

"So you see, folks, your skin color defines you. It determines your culture, your tastes, your interests, and your ability to communicate and empathize. No white person could ever understand a black person's concerns. No black person could ever truly be the same as a white person."

Reading your mental gymnastics is like watching a confused medium channel a Klan member. It's not just stupid, it borders on evil.

Either we are individuals, or we aren't. Either our differences are due (partly or wholly) to our race, or they aren't. If race is just the color of our skin, then culture and social influences explain our differences, and, consequentially, we can ALL understand each other, because our differences are the product of experience, not kind. That's where I stand.

Your statements above would be agreed with by any racial supremacist out there. It posits that racial divisions are uncrossable and unbridgeable, because they are the product of race itself. Otherwise color wouldn't matter, just lived experience. That's a pernicious idea, and one you should not be comfortable holding...

An expansion for EUIV? That's surprising...

jdreyer wrote on Sep 29, 2017, 12:25:
A while ago we had a similar discussion, and came to the conclusion that eventually you'd pay full price for an essentially empty game: all the necessary components would be available via microtransaction/DLC.

DCS is pretty much this already, though the base "game" is free (source: am flight sim fan)...

I read this title totally differently. My LawBreakers-Free Weekend is underway, meaning that I won't so much as see the game for the entire weekend...

Thanks for the review! You saved me some money and/or a refund. I don't have the twitch reflexes anymore to make this kind of game fun...

Hmmm, color me skeptical. FTL was great because it had a very focused scope and did what it tried to do very well. Saying, "This will be FTL, only more!" doesn't necessarily mean it will even be as good as FTL. It seems like there are a lot more things that can be done poorly when you try to do a lot more. We'll see...

Well, museums have always had a problem attracting teenaged boys. And pictures of half-naked women from video games can't hurt...

Suppa7 wrote on Sep 2, 2017, 22:58:

Nucas wrote on Sep 2, 2017, 17:05:
this was extra funny to me because you fucked up an url link in your post.

I was fully aware but it was late and I didn't care.

Sounds like the rationale behind the release of buggy games. You, sir, have what it takes to be a AAA developer!

Wesp5 wrote on Aug 2, 2017, 10:21:
And another walking simulator where you only observe and to not act or interact with NPCs. For a good story I rather read a book or watch a movie if there is little I can actually do in the game world anyway...

It's by the same people as Gone Home, so expect the usual suspects in the games media (their friends, sexual partners, and allies) to lose their minds praising the "game."

Amusingly enough, the same people who adamantly declare that we should be open to all kinds of people, regardless of their physical, ethnic, gender characteristics, that diversity is our strength, etc., operate as a narrow little clique. If someone outside the clique published a walking simulator of comparable quality (or even something with actual game mechanics... see "House Party"), they'd be waiting with bated breath to tear it apart (especially if it had boobies in it!). So, despite all the rhetoric, the great defenders of "diversity" in games are still just motivated by protecting the "in" group (their friends). Kek manifests in mysterious ways... (Blues needs a good Pepe smiley)

Cutter wrote on Jul 26, 2017, 16:57:

jdreyer wrote on Jul 26, 2017, 15:22:
Gotta love how McCain votes to take away people's government-sponsored healthcare after being a recipient of government-sponsored healthcare his entire life: first in the military, then as a member of congress.

"All for me, none for thee."

Yeah, I was going to same thing. Doncha just love how all those cockbags voting to take away the peoples healthcare are themselves recipients of the best benefit packages that money can buy paid for by those same people they want to take away the already bare minimum that they receive. GOP supporters are fine with being needlessly raped by the military-industrial complex but god forbid people get even basic healthcare. Imagine if Britain had won the War of Indpendence, you'd all have health and dental care right now.

So long as the death panel decides that you deserve the treatment or that the treatment meets their criteria for "success." Ask the parents of Charlie Gard how that works out...

Honestly, I love Smart Brother (let's see who gets the reference) as much as the next guy, but I don't play video games for a "realistic" space experience. Not that there isn't room for a good, detailed space sim (maybe someone should kickstart that? Should be doable for under $150 mil ), but sometimes reality isn't that much fun. Give me Xwing over the Space Shuttle Simulator any day...

Beamer wrote on Jul 19, 2017, 09:38:

Kxmode wrote on Jul 18, 2017, 21:25:

The Half Elf wrote on Jul 18, 2017, 19:01:
A GM has control on how many facial animators they hire right?

None. As General Manager of BioWare, he will be responsible for driving the studio's culture, climate, mission, product directions, and ultimately profit for both BioWare and EA. Hopefully, under Casey's leadership, the openly hostile and toxic culture of both overt racism and forced fed social justice warrior nonsense can finally be stymied. Furthermore, having the studio return to the way they used to be is in EA's best interest.

EA must have seen Marvel, Pixar, and Lucasfilm to know that when Disney, for the most part, backs away and lets those studios do their thing, both reap success. I hope EA does this with BioWare under Casey's stead and eventually adopt it as a standard for their other properties.

It's funny, you talk to people that work there and they all love it. None complain it was openly hostile or toxic.

But then, here's the white guy on the internet with hurt feelings who's never once spoken to a person on the inside, just angry at one dude tweeting.

Non sequitur. No one here cares (nor does EA) how "happy" the studio employees are with the politics and/or direction of the studio. EA certainly doesn't care about a welcoming or hostile work environment (nor did the OP mention this - you're responding to an argument he didn't make). We, the consumers, care whether or not BioWare creates fun and engaging games (and ME:A was a dud). EA cares that BioWare makes games that will sell a lot, and thereby make tons of money (see above). Interestingly enough, those two outcomes are connected. Whether the assistant second animator is happy with the political correctness of the latest story really isn't.

It's funny how the social justice self-righteous always tend to answer questions that were not asked or disagree with comments not made. Gives them a chance to preen, I suppose.

Don't the candy crush people sue everyone who uses "saga" in their name? This should be interesting...