ipaqi's forum posts

  • 32 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#1 Posted by ipaqi (74 posts) -

To this day, every time I remember Ryan I get both sad and happy at the same time. He was awesome, and I got so much for myself just from listening to him talk a few times a week.

So I'm gonna take tomorrow (A day late perhaps, but today isn't possible for me) and stream a bunch of Saints Row IV, because it's exactly the kind of dumb fun Ryan Davis taught me to love.

Oh, geez. I guess Sad + Happy = Sappy :/

#2 Posted by ipaqi (74 posts) -

Sadly, I cannot indulge in bourbon or the like to honor the man. So instead I'm going to stream a bunch of Saints Row IV over parts of Friday here at +2 GMT. If anyone wants to watch, the twitch stream I plan on using is twitch.tv/criticalpathplays

I just feel like the perfect way to honor the man is by having some good dumb fun.

#3 Posted by ipaqi (74 posts) -

Kind of skipped reading 200 comments in this thread, so sorry if I'm repeating anything said.

In my experience, Tom Mc Shea isn't one to say things to get hits or to just be controversial. He has his own opinion, and he is normally steadfast in representing it.

However, in my experience, Tom Mc Shea has a vast history of being wrongheaded with regards to certain issues. The most egregious I've seen in the last few months is coming dangerously close to calling Crytek head Cevat Yerli a liar for proclaiming his confidence in Ryse. That, and, on multiple occasions, wishing Ryse failed so bad it would cause a significant business impact on the entire industry, simply because he didn't like what he heard on a preview that he read on Kotaku, from a dude he doesn't work with and (as far as I gathered) didn't have any significant relationship with.

The problem with listening to Tom Mc Shea talking about games is that he is entirely incapable of a change of mind. Which means he'll never admit to be mistaken. Which means it's nearly impossible to discuss with him any amount of controversy he himself has begotten.

#4 Posted by ipaqi (74 posts) -

C'mon, valve. This isn't the important thing. This isn't the thing that might harm you business-wise, but still needs to be done, b/c it's the right thing to do.

You need to get trading in your system if you want to even halfway fake caring about your consumers.

#5 Edited by ipaqi (74 posts) -

@leinad44: He actually backed off of most of the anti-Blow stuff. Except for the crux of his argument of coverage being a two-way street (whether you agree or not).

#8 Posted by ipaqi (74 posts) -

This ZenPencils comic made me think of this post:

http://zenpencils.com/comic/125-marie-curie-life-is-not-easy/

#9 Posted by ipaqi (74 posts) -

I'm sorry, I can't side with Fish on this one. I have few red lines when it comes to what I'll suffer from people, online or offline, and when someone passes that line, I either block them on twitter, or move away.

My red lines are threats (direct or veiled), hate-speech, and someone vocalizing a wish for something really bad to happen to someone else.

Sadly, as an Israeli Jew, I've been subjected to all three in my relatively short time on this big blue space-blob.

So when some Youtube sausage-molester tells me that I should die or leave my country or both, I click "spam" and move on. When some twitter-twat goes on and on, calling me names and I've been trying to sleep for an hour, I block him.

Yeah, it's probably not easy being hounded on a semi-regular basis by internet homunculi whose only redeeming feature is that they are too illiterate, unimportant and unnecessary to actually matter, in the grand scheme of things. But having been (most often indirectly) called a child-killer, the progeny of pigs and apes, and many other, and far worse things, I find it absolutely adorable that he "couldn't take it anymore."

Oh, also, telling someone, no matter the effin' context, that they should kill themselves, is wrong. And saying that he was quoting Futurama doesn't excuse it. All it means is that the thought of telling someone to off themselves didn't come out of Fish's rage-addled brain all by itself.

#10 Posted by ipaqi (74 posts) -

As a developer (not of games yet, but business-related software), I totally get parceling out your content.

However, I don't have any particular praise for the second part being free.

If the "contract" we both agreed to stipulates that for my $15/20 I bought the game, then I've bought the whole, complete game, whenever it's released. By parceling out your content and/or having an Early Access (or Preview) version that you can pay to opt-in on, you have - in every discernible way - turned your game from a simple product into a service. This means that you can get away with a less complete content-/feature-set in the initial version, but that you don't get to re-charge people money when you finish the work.

It's very gratifying to see this sort of thing (which is a lot more visible in business software) happen in a medium that has had a lot of problems with over-charging and under-delivering on a product in the last 5-7 years.

  • 32 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4