Jetpaction's forum posts

  • 34 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#1 Edited by Jetpaction (77 posts) -

Not sure if the issue is on my side but speed has been dramatic for me since the move, especially downloading videos take ages with speeds that max out around 250kb/sec. Not even enough to stream a video. I'm on a 50/4 Mbit connection in Europe, and trying to download the QLEX from Galak-Z in HD format but it's not going any faster than 250kb/sec and I had to resume the download a few times already because it times out.

#2 Posted by Jetpaction (77 posts) -

Smart move. Early Access, Alpha, Beta, these are terms that are more common then ever in the videogame industry nowadays.

Looking forward to the multiple Unfinished: Star Citizen video's where Drew and Vinny show their hangar and ships. I feel those guys are interested in that game and this new video format is perfect for that!

#3 Posted by Jetpaction (77 posts) -

I've noticed loading times for Last Of Us are really short with an SSD. I did bought the digital version so no reading from the disc. I can imagine it has the same sort of impact on the PS4. It'll be a bit more smoother and faster overall, but the biggest win for me is no HDD read/write noise but pure silence. The original 80GB HDD in my PS3 was very loud.

#4 Posted by Jetpaction (77 posts) -

Is there a disadvantage in terms of available bandwidth for people living in Europe when streaming video's?

I have 60/6 internet connection but on a regular base the video player won't buffer enough causing the video to stop after a couple of minutes. However, if I choose to download the video to my harddrive i get decent speeds ( 4 to 5 MB/sec).

OS: Mac OSX 10.8

Browser: Safari

RAM: 16 GB

Type of player: HTML5, Flash - HD quality

Adblock: On, Off. Doesn't matter

#5 Edited by Jetpaction (77 posts) -

Unbelievable. The guy was only 2 years older than I am. I can't imagine dying so young...

Ryan, I will miss you. The site will never be the same without you. I cannot imagine how the next podcast is going to be without you hosting it. Heartbreaking.

Rest in peace, buddy.

#7 Edited by Jetpaction (77 posts) -

@mrfluke said:

@gaspower said:

@mrfluke said:

@posh said:

@sephirm87 said:

It's unfortunate that Microsoft backed down because so many gamers want to continue to live in the past. People who don't have high speed internet connection will either have to get an internet connection and join the rest of us in the 21st century, or stay behind and not enjoy games. It is a rather simple trade-off.

not everyone has that kind of money to spend on decent internet. you're also excluding anybody who doesn't live in an urban area, where there isn't necessarily easy access to the internet - i live in such a place. imagine if DVD players required a constant internet connection. there's no need for alienation of that scale for such a widely celebrated entertainment medium. maybe think twice about your narrow-mindedness

if the data here is right, there is a VERY sizeable population in the US that DOESNT have great internet

http://www.broadbandmap.gov/technology

sometimes, people need to head outside every now and then and realize that there is a sizeable population that isnt always online.

I actually loved the fact that you could have shared the games digitally and have had a digital copy in your library even if the game was bought at retail. What did suck however is the 24 hour check-in. I just hope down the line MS would be able to find a more elegant solution to that even though that particular policy must have been decided upon with months maybe even years of surveys and research before it was even decided upon, which sucks since that was probably as close of a good solution that they were able to come up with even with all that time and money being invested.

the thing that sticks me from that sharing plan being all that as amazing as the pro digital guys claimed for, is ok, if you could share your games with up to 10 people or even if it was the whole only 1 person can use the game at a time and they cant play the same game your playing....... how is that not just exploited to all hell, where you can wise up with your buddies and have 1 out of the 10 in the group buy a game and just pass the game around for your buddies to play?, the early adopters will be us always online internet people after all and if it was that loose then that would definitely damm singleplayer focused games.

(i could then coordinate with my buddies saying, "ok you buy watch dogs, ill buy assassins creed 4 and ill loan you AC4 when im done if you'ill loan me Watch_dogs" or "hey can you loan me COD ghosts for a day? i just wanna play the campaign, not really interested in buying the game")

and IF its true that the publishers are now hearing of these things, i wouldnt be surprised if they bring up these similar points to microsoft, and then come gamescom they revealed some catches with that plan that just pisses off everyone.

But if you really look at their family sharing plan, it's basically the same thing that's already happening in an offline mode now; People lend out their physical copies to friends and there's no stopping that from a publishers perspective. The advantage of Microsofts digital loaning system is that there's more income for the publishers since there's no more involvement from shops like Gamestop. And they can limit the amount of games you can share with your friends online as where with physical copies a game can be given to multiple peoples or trade in at stores like Gamestop.

#8 Posted by Jetpaction (77 posts) -

I've always been in the pro-Xbox one camp from the initial reveal. I suppose I could see past the negatives to the benefits of what Microsoft was always envisioning. And that's where they went wrong I think.

Microsoft did not communicate the benefits of the system and seemed to only discuss the negatives, which a lot of people picked up on.

I am very surprised a company as large as Microsoft don't know how to deal with their, often demanding, customers. It's really very simple. They should have stuck with drm as it is today and then provided extra benefits to customers who bought in to an all-digital future. Provide a digital copy of the game from release (actually better if you could pre-download it) and, for example, make it $10 cheaper, share it with 10 family members for free, provide online only benefits like cloud powered AI etc., free DLC for digital versions of the game, exclusive achievements (youve made 10 digital purchases), I could go on and on.

The key is to Make their CUSTOMERS make the decision to shift to an all-digital future, don't force it. Provide benefits for switching and it will happen organically.

Maybe I'm just naive?

Good article Alex. One of the few I've read this week which isn't demonising Microsoft...

Yes, I like your thinking. This is what I was thinking about as well. Let the consumers decide if they want the physical version of the game or the digital one. Microsoft (or Sony for that matter) and the publisher should work together on making the digital version more appealing for the consumer, add some incentives.

Let me give an example: The Xbox One is released and Battlefield 4 is out as well. The consumer could buy the physical copy of the game for 59 Euro (although if you search online you should be able to find it for 45 - 50 Euro). All is well for the consumer, he has a physical copy of the game and can play it offline (The single player campaign of course), lent it out to a friend or sell it to someone. But what if Microsoft and EA agreed to also have a digital version of the game for, let's say, 55 Euro but it includes Premium or a Season Pass. Would the consumer still buy the physical disk? If he wants all the DLC he'll have to purchase this separately, which would make the total cost of the game around 75 or 80 euro, thus making the game more expensive than the digital copy.

#9 Posted by Jetpaction (77 posts) -

Very good article Alex! I'm with you for 100%.

The digital-only videogame age will come eventually, but with baby steps. How many baby steps will be decided by the consumers and not by Sony or Microsoft.

#10 Edited by Jetpaction (77 posts) -

For next-gen consoles; it's not unthinkable AMD will use it's own version of PhysX. I recall the latest Tomb Raider had the TressFX option, which makes Lara's hair look more natural (and in some ways more unnatural ;-)

  • 34 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4