...but I think that 15 bucks a month isn't as horrific as what you guys are making it out to be. Relatively speaking, that's not a bad value when compared to other things you could buy for the same amount. I'm not interested in playing Galaxies, but if there was a really well-designed online game, I could easily see myself plopping down that amount every month. Heck, I probably would've paid that much to play Diablo 2 or BF1942 back when I was heavily into those games.

Consider that there are millions of people who are going to pay over 15 bucks to bring a date to see "From Justin to Kelly" this weekend. Maybe you'll be just as much of an idiot to pay that much for a month of online gaming, but at least you get a whole month of torturous agony, as opposed to an hour and a half of it.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

From http://www.business2.com/articles/mag/0,1640,42210|2,00.html

I googled to find this game's budget.

"Some pundits are betting that Galaxies could end up making more money than this year's Star Wars movie. That's where Smedley comes in. A tall man with a broad forehead accentuated by a receding hairline, he loves his games so much that he has a satellite dish on his fishing boat to keep track of their progress. Galaxies is his biggest project to date; it cost an estimated $10 million to develop. Smedley is betting on its success. If he's right, it could change not just Sony, but the face of entertainment."

Of course, this article is almost a year old; I would guess that the price has gone up a couple mil due to the delays, but I'm no accountant.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

NONE of you understand ANYTHING. What REALLY happened is that there's one all-powerful group that controls every company in the world; this group has gone by many different names throughout history, but the current leadership is the inhuman product of genetic splicing between the former leaders of the Illuminati cabal and the scions of the Rothschild family. This group runs everything through a pyramid of corporate interests, political bribery, and influenced social upheaval.

So, obviously, these gentlemen who were let go are mole people from the year 10,000.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

Upon it's release, the sequel to the 1998 hit first-person shooter will, no doubt, shatter all record sales and instantly become a must have, a classic, and become the new standard all in one fell swoop.

Geez, get excited much?

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

I think the amount of work required to make co-op work, what with making sure the two players can never get permanently separated by changes in environment, making sure the scripting works when different players might be in the lead at any one time, etc., probably isn't worth the effort on the part of game devs, esp. since it appeals to a fairly hardcore segment of the gaming population. Given the state of the games that have been coming out recently, I would be happy just to have some decent single-player FPS'. Co-op is fun in games like Serious Sam, but I have a feeling the more story-driven the game is, the harder it is to not make co-op mode break everything when it's implemented. I'm no programmer, though, so what do I know.

"SP just sucks ass"

Sometimes reading what people think is worth saying leaves me speechless.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot
This comment was edited on Jun 12, 13:40.

"I think it would be better if they allowed both sexes for ALL of the races."

I'm sure this is just a time issue. I imagine the choice of sex/race will have no real effect on the gameplay. Though, now that I think about it, this would be an interesting way to implement difficulty levels; have, say, a race that's not particularly force-adept be the harder difficulty level, while you could run through the game as a Yoda or whatever for the easiest difficulty.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

Fuck you, you fucking shitfuck bitch!

...it was also memorable for the language.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

I kept shooting the little guys, but they kept on flying out of the walls. No matter how many I killed, more kept coming. Maybe I missed something, but when I was playing, there was no way to kill them permanently.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

I just played the demo for this. I think Elite Force II might show up in the dictionary some day as the opposite of fun.

If I wanted to play Serious Sam, I'd play Serious Sam. The Star Trek universe seems particularly ill-suited to hyperbolic run-n-gun gameplay. Maybe it's just me, but it's difficult to overcome the first impression there; infinite enemies (strike one) hounding you while you try to manuever through a jumping puzzle (strike two) that's being inundated with huge jets of flame (strike three). I didn't bother finishing it.

Edit: And yeah, I got a little further along then that. Specifically to the part where my teammate kept dying. This is probably more of a temperamental opposition than anything else; I prefer deliberate gameplay where you fight two or three tough opponents at a time, not a dozen little creepies.


http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

This comment was edited on Jun 11, 19:17.

Hopefully this'll breathe life into BF1942. Should've been released six months ago.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

Granted, I haven't played Diablo II for a while, but I wish they'd leave people who just use maphack alone. It tightens up the gaming experience, reducing the amount of time people have to run around looking for the entrance to a cave, or whatever. It can't even be put in the same class as a maphack in WC3. Just my opinion...I would reinstall D2 for the 1.10 patch but I fear for my sanity if I do. I used to play that game far more than can be considered healthy.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

Nevermind, it is a different one.

And I take that back about the movies being cool to watch. The charm of the stuff that they've done before was that it was all edited from in-game footage; this is just what will almost surely become the CGI intro to the expansion pack.

I have pretty grave reservations about the gameplay mechanics DiCE is adding here. I mean, rocketpacks? God only knows how this'll wind up being...hopefully it'll be good, but it could easily wind up being unplayed by hardcore BF1942 addicts.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

Wasn't this already available on their site? Or is this a different one?

Either way, one thing's for sure: those bastards put some effort into their movies. They're not just a clip of some random stuff happening; they're tightly edited and always a blast to watch.

Edit: Well, I downloaded the one from Worthplaying and got sound, but no picture.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

This comment was edited on Jun 10, 19:42.

Going to be interesting to see which one winds up the better game, sociological asides notwithstanding. I'm personally betting on CoD; though it doesn't look like it's much of a graphical improvement over MoH, it looks like it's going to be straight-up action. MoV looks a little weird, at least based on the E3 movie. What's up with that aiming mechanism? I don't see any practical benefit to enabling System-Shock style shooting in an FPS; we are able to look up and down, after all.

Edit: I don't know what "bettering" is, so it's safe to say it's not something I can do.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot
This comment was edited on Jun 10, 10:10.

New V miniseries? Should be interesting to see what they come up with.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

I'm not going to pretend to have read any of the debates about multiplayer after it came out, but after playing it for a bit before the patches, it just wasn't fun. Lots of force whoring, lots of "I'm going to Pull you and knock you down and then turn around and do an unblockable backstab that kills you in one hit when you get up!" that made no sense whatsoever. I kind of doubt a broad suite of force powers is compatible with a really fun multiplayer experience; it's all just too chaotic and unpredictable, and leads to exploits like the backstabbing thing (which took Raven WAY too long to fix).

The concept of mini-duels was pretty cool, but I doubt I'll even bother with Jedi Academy multiplayer unless it's a vast improvement over the first game's MP. There's too many other fun options out there.


http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot
This comment was edited on Jun 4, 16:18.

A good rail shooter is better than a bad FPS. I played through Red Faction II, and the only level I really enjoyed was the one where you were the gunner on the tank.

I don't really have much of an impulse to play one on my computer, but they're mighty fun on a console, with a lightgun.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

I haven't mowed mine for two weeks. I've lost count, but I feel confident that it has rained at least a little for at least 25 of the last 30 days.

At least there won't be a drought this year, though.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

Wolfenstein, I am sorry for your loss. My condolences.

In other news, Enemy Territory is fun. And free. And possesses mouse and keyboard input.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot

The one thing that I will always appreciate voodoo extreme for was giving Old Man Murray a target. Now that was comedy.

http://www.matthewrorie.com
http://users.ign.com/collection/Azraelot