Technically, doesn't the multiplayer make *more* sense if one team is playing the 'bad guys'? I never played the MW games, but I always assumed the multiplayer was like Counterstrike (Ts vs. CTs). Apparently it was CTs vs....CTs? Okay, that makes lots of sense guys. But hey it's far less offensive for US troops to be killing each other, right?
Sounds like they're planning to address most of the shortcomings of the first game. The first game was just a bit too simple, and I found little reason to replay it after beating it once. I don't get the MMO thing though. It is absolutely futile to make a fantasy MMO as long as WoW exists. The only modern MMOs that met some success were City of Heroes and Eve Online, both of which had a totally different setting and theme from WoW. I can't possibly see a Torchl
A suggestion for the Beam Pact; change it to a Laser Pact and have it affect Visari Pulse Weapons. This would make it just as useful to Advent as it is currently, but be much more useful to TEC and Visari and help those poor LFs scale a bit better into the endgame.
Meh, let me know when IE gets adblock plus and noscript. They're pretty much mandetory for blocking out all the garbage that pops up at you these days.
[quote who="-RAISTLIN-" reply="28" id="2712860"]i fucking hate stupid "sticky-back" cover systems. the only reason they're so popular is because controllers suck for shooters.[/quote] Even more hilarious is that from looking over reviews, any console shooter that doesn't use this system gets blasted by critics now. Not only is it a giant gameplay crutch to make up for not having a mouse and keyboard, but it's apparently now a crutch they'll have to use forever.
I just hope they don't forget the most important aspect of what made DK work: the humour.
I somehow doubt he actually wants to use Steamworks when he mentions Stardock has just made its own DRM system to match it. It sounds more like he'll use it only if the entire industry starts using it, at which point we all lose anyway since Steam will then have a monopoly.
I won't hold my breath this time around. When they release a playable demo, then I'll believe there's some chance in hell it will see a release.
But that's exactly what I don't get, why do they need to use a license to make a new FPS? They could easily just have made a FPS called 'Alienshock' without using the X-Com license. In fact, by using the license here they're just going to hurt their review scores as people view it as an X-Com game, not an original title. It's not like X-Com and Syndicate had a unique plot or characters that they want to re-use, they were just great games that happened to be about
I was really excited when I first heard about a new Syndicate...then I too realized it will most likely be turned into a squad-based FPS instead of a remake of the original. Why do these companies even bother paying royalties for the licenses if they're just going to make generic crap with them? Movie license games I can understand somewhat as they're universally horrible games that would never stand on their own. But why use the X-Com or Syndicate license and then make some
It looks decent as modern shooters go, but I'm not seeing the Holy Sh!t Awesome here. Though I can't say I've been excited about ANY shooter for years, so it's probably just me. But I will agree with the sentiments in this thread over consoles. I finally broke down and got a PS3 (hooked up to my PC monitor and speakers of course, new TVs are expensive!) and I'm having a blast with numerous games that will never be ported over to PC. Some people make it sound like you
Sins Forums
I'm not even sure if the devs themselves understand the game. That's what happens when you don't encourage a strong competitive community in any sort of game. Data from high level players is the best way to see what units and techs are overused/underused, race win %, what sorts of maps layouts players prefer, etc. Without that data, the devs are just making changes blind. And blind balance changes seems to have been the tr
Sins Forums
Not really surprising, SC2 lowered the activity of every online PC game. While some people will go back to their older games after the newness wears off, the thing is there needs to be something to return to. Without a major patch, there isn't a lot of reason to come back to multiplayer Sins IMO. The game is too imbalanced and stagnant. Regardless of whether you like SC2 fast pace or not, the superior balance and community size (can't play Sins if there's nobody to pla
Sins Forums
I always thought that battleship caps were primarily supposed to be 'hero killers' while simply being good tanks in any other situation. The Visari one does this perfectly with the passive manaburn and power surge. The Advent one is great at screwing other caps, but its tanking ability doesn't improve its survivability much. Then there's the Kol, which does neither. The gauss cannon doesn't do enough damage to scare off other caps, and it doesn't have the antimatter to
Sins Forums
There was some discussion on cap balance in the general forums a while back. I largely lost interest due to the stagnation of the game (this mod is the only reason it's still on the my drive), so I don't know what became of it. There were some generally agreed upon changes regardless of how bomber and LRM spam warp the metagame, like rebalancing the Kol shield ability to a passive, major ability buffs to most of the support caps, throwing Animosity into the garbage and coming up w
The biggest reason video cards don't need upgrading nearly as often these days is that the biggest GPU hog, FPS', have all moved to consoles now. When was the last time any PC gamer seriously took a look at video cards? That's right, when Crysis came out; regardless if you actually wanted to play it or not. Crysis 2 is going to be a console multi-platform game, which means current PC hardware will once again be more than sufficient to run anything out there. Even Valve
[quote who="Tridus" reply="86" id="2696912"] Being at that lower level with control over everything really puts the onus on the player. Win or lose, there's nothing that wasn't under your control so you were most likely just outplayed. In some games where you don't have the same degree of micromanagement, it starts to feel like you're just sort of directing stuff. Oh my guys beat his guys, but they didn't much need me to do it.[/quote] While there are merits to both styles, I don
A group of friends I regularly play with are all hardcore RTS fans, and not one of us is interested in this. One guy got into the beta and we all tried it out, and after the initial excitement wore off we all just kind of shrugged and went back to other games. SC2 is TOO old school. After seeing newer games try to advance the genre like Dawn of War 1, Company of Heroes, and Sins of a Solar Empire we just can't go back to a RTS where clicks per minute decides more games than
While it's Valve's right to ban people for no reason if people agreed to the fine print, the whole 'guilty without any facts or appeal' is kind of insane. It's like if your city mailed you a fine without saying anything more than you 'committed a violation' and have already taken the money out of your bank account to pay it.
Another factor is that most new games are multi-platform releases. When making these games, the developers obviously design the game so that they will run on the weakest hardware (the 360). Current high-end PC video cards vastly surpass that threshold, and thus there's ironically no reason for them to exist. My friend was running Resident Evil 5 on a machine with a Radeon 2600 XT. It looked and ran great at around the settings it would have on the 360 version. Wh
I can easily believe digital sales are going up, and not just for PC. There are more and more digital-download only games even for consoles. It's a great way for smaller and indie publishers to give their games 'shelf space' without having to compete with EA, Ubisoft, and other giants at the retail level. And that's a good thing IMO. Retailers are notorious for never cutting prices on old games or having sales. Their idea of a discount is offering $5 less than fu
Norton/Symantec is a hilarious AV system. The company I work at uses it, and the performance of a machine before and after it gets installed is like night and day. It literally takes about an extra 1-5 minutes of loading after logging in, depending on the machine after Symantec is installed. Whenever it runs a scheduled scan, you might as well go on a break as it more or less hogs 100% of system resources then running the scan. It claims it isn't, but good luck trying
The only surprising part is that some people still thought certain tool spyware bars were actually okay. If they were legitimate software, they wouldn't keep trying to sneak them in with random freeware apps. The fact you have to take action to NOT install them tells you all you need to know about them. And I feel the OPs pain. I do IT support at a company that still had a few people with IE6 and 7.&nb
It's partly a surplus problem as well. When I was in high school the idiot councellors kept pushing computers, computers, computers. Well now there's so many people with Comp-Sci degrees that programmers are getting minimum wage in some areas. There will be a turnaround point though. Kids in high school see and hear the treatment of programmers by these big companies, and the number of Comp-Sci applicants will drop sharply. Soon EA and such will not be able to th
While it's kind of cliche, Microsoft bears a large porition of the blame for this new way of doing business in the gaming industry. As Nesrie said, my ISP charges me money so why should I have to pay extra to access basic multiplayer features? Yet the XBox does exactly that and people went for it. Once the industry realized how spend-happy this new generation of gamers was, that was it. Soon you were seeing $10 horse armour add-ons, and people were buying it .&