Raven10's forum posts

#1 Posted by Raven10 (1807 posts) -

I honestly can't remember. We got it early on like mid-90's. My Dad got his first computer in the mid-80's, so by the time I was born a couple years later we already had a computer. I don't remember exactly when we got on the Internet. I know that by the late 90's we were using AOL as I remember being a dumb kid using AOL chatrooms and AIM. I also think having a computer since birth made me have a very unique perspective on games. My parents would never buy me a console as a kid so 90% of my gaming experiences growing up were on a Gameboy or on a PC which I bet is the exact opposite of most 90's kids.

#2 Posted by Raven10 (1807 posts) -

@ll_exile_ll: Yea that is kind of my opinion as well. It's just confusing right now. Most people are going to hear rumblings on forums and such about technical issues and assume that the score discrepancy is due to those technical issues. After all that is generally GS's policy. Each platform gets the same review outside of noting issues specific to that platform. You would be easily forgiven for not wanting to read what you would think would be the same review just slightly altered for a second time and thus never realize that it is an entirely different review.

I think in the end I would have had the reviewer review both versions of the game and downgrade the current Xbone review to an alternate take. There is no perfect solution here but I think that solution would cause the least confusion for the casual reader. In all honesty, though, I simply wouldn't have reviewed the PC version in this situation, similar to how Gamespot didn't review the PC version of Kane and Lynch after Jeff was fired. There just is no good way to go about doing that, so really the best solution is just to not write a review at all. In the end this review is doing more harm than good in helping consumers choose whether or not to buy the game which is supposed to be the point of a review.

#3 Posted by Raven10 (1807 posts) -

Yea they were in a tough spot. The original reviewer I'm sure was let go along with everyone else last month so it's not like they could do as they normally do and just update the existing review. And the new reviewer didn't seem to like the game at all. I dunno how I feel about it. I mean I get why they had to get a new reviewer for the PC version, but if they were going to score it that wildly differently I might have had the new review listed under their alternate takes section or something like that.

And also him basically not mentioning any of the technical issues at all in the review made me really wonder if maybe they chose the right person for the job. I see his issues with the racism and sexism but on the same token it's supposed to be a parody. Not finding the joke funny isn't reason enough to trash a game in my opinion. Tough call all around there.

#4 Edited by Raven10 (1807 posts) -

@nightriff: Well it is published by Microsoft so I would highly doubt a Sony release but most of Microsoft's XBLA games eventually hit PC so that wouldn't be super surprising.

#5 Posted by Raven10 (1807 posts) -

@corruptedevil: Oh. That could be true. My mistake then. Probably just the super high quality AA giving the image such a clean, sharp look then. Looking at this I wouldn't be shocked if it was straight up super-sampled. Considering each area is like 10 feet big running it at an internal 2k resolution wouldn't be a major challenge.

#6 Edited by Raven10 (1807 posts) -
@euandewar said:

@corruptedevil said:
@aegon said:
@corruptedevil said:
@aegon said:
  • Looks better than I thought a PSP port would.

Really? It looks about as good as Peace Walker HD to me.

I haven't looked at PW HD.

Couldn't tell you why specifically but Type-0 looks significantly better than PW HD to my eyes. Or at least the characters do.

This was off screen footage so that might have to do with some of this but two parts of the visual makeup stuck out to me.

- They are using some hardcore anti-aliasing for this game. I didn't see a single aliased edge during that entire video nor any sub-pixel shimmer that would be telling of the low quality AA methods used last generation. Might be more evident with footage captured from the screen not shot off-screen but I didn't notice any aliasing at all. That is going to make the entire game look way better than it would otherwise.

- They are also using some super-high quality motion blur. The low quality blur we saw on games last generation tended to just make things look worse a lot of the time. But the really high quality effect they are using here really adds to the cinematic look of the game.

Also worth noting this is running in 1080p vs 720p for the Peace Walker HD version and they are using very high resolution textures and maybe even a pass of tessellation as well. The fire, smoke, and other alpha effects also seemed to be rendered in full resolution/framerate although being off screen footage that was hard to tell just by eyeballing it.

I think the only thing that bothered me about the visual makeup was how segmented each area was. Obviously that was a way of getting around the super limited amount of RAM in the PSP but having to load in a new area every 10 feet is going to be a bit annoying. I guess it would have been asking a hell of a lot for them to connect each room as it would require that they add in an entire streaming system into the game or to fit every level within the RAM from the start, but that would have completely transformed the pacing of this game.

#7 Posted by Raven10 (1807 posts) -

@onlineatron: Well that is good news. I always thought Killzone was an interesting concept for a story ruined by terrible dialogue and character development. With an actual writer involved hopefully this will live up to the interesting premise.

#8 Posted by Raven10 (1807 posts) -

I really hope if their new game is an RPG that they have hired a full-time writer to write the story cause a whole RPG featuring Killzone quality storytelling would probably be among the worst things I could imagine.

#9 Posted by Raven10 (1807 posts) -

@dagas said:

You cannot compare the Republicans with the Swedish Democrats. SD again and again have scandals because their party members do everything from wearing nazi symbols to writing on racist forums. SD is like the Tea Party faction maybe. Except they are in many way socialists. Nationalists and socialists in one...almost like they are nationalsocialists. I hope we are not heading in the same direction as Germany in the 30's, we are far from it still but I fear it.

They still didn't win the election, they have 13% but unlike in the US where the winnes takes all they get enough seats in the parlament to prevent either the left wing or right wing alliances to reach the 50% needed for anything to pass through parlament.

In the US what you wear as a politician can quite literally ruin your career. I can assure you that quite a few Republicans from specific areas support a majority of Nazi beliefs. Really outside of the Republican party being about as pro-Jew as you are going to see in a government outside of Israel they tend to lean a lot closer to Nazis than to most modern Western governments on many issues. I mean in Arizona where many of the most extreme Republicans originate police can legally stop a person driving down the road and arrest them just because they happen to look Latino. That is called racism and it is legal and supported by most Arizona voters. You should take a look at the current protests in a town called Ferguson where a cop shot an unarmed man who was just walking down the street six times in the back just because he was black. As of now he has not been reprimanded at all. Republicans don't wear Swastikas because Nazis are evil. Why are they evil? Most Americans couldn't tell you even the most basic list of their actions. But Nazis are evil and wearing a Nazi symbol means you are evil. It's about as simple as it gets here. The actual politics and beliefs of the Nazis are entirely irrelevant.

And the US Congress isn't set up differently than a parlament as far as factions taking control of the government. You need a majority vote to pass any law. The thing is that due to the difficulty in getting a new party recognized on a national level, we've had the same two parties vying for control of the government since the second World War. And just recently the Republicans shoved through a change to campaign legislation that lets businesses essentially sponsor politicians. When you have a multi-billion dollar corporation paying for your TV-ads no small party has a chance. Hence why our Congress has an approval level of something like 10% yet in the election in November I would bet at least 70% of current congressmen retain their positions.

So trust me when I say that I sincerely wish only 13% of our government was made up of Neo-Nazi racists, and that I wish we had enough parties that coalitions had to be made to force some degree of compromise.

#10 Posted by Raven10 (1807 posts) -

Your post just made me realize that I have the white site running on one computer and the black site on another. Totally didn't even notice until this very moment, and I've been a member of this site since the very first day it came online. Shows how much I pay attention to this stuff.