scamp115's forum posts

  • 13 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by scamp115 (13 posts) -
@Kibblez said:
" I'd be way into this is if it were coming to the UK. right now, I'm not. "
If I am not mistaken they have started a limited trial in Europe. There are no promises made with the service, it really depends on if they have a data center close enough to where you live. Try out the PC client and see how it does. 
 
I am really impressed with this technology. I have only ever had issues with the service when running their WiFi beta, but even then the games look great and have minimal lag. Granted my local machine can best this service in any of the games that they have available, so I won't be rushing to buy games from Onlive. I can see a market for this. People just need to give the service a chance.
#2 Posted by scamp115 (13 posts) -

I was thinking along the same lines as Vitamin_Dei, someone could have configured the router to block access to ranges of IP addresses, but it may be time to look into securing your wireless router. You may be comfortable with other people using it without your expressed consent, but everything you do on that network is visible to anyone who connects to it. That means a guy sitting outside with a laptop can see your email activity (gmail just released started encrypting all of their traffic), and that may not seem like much but once they own your email account it is a simple matter of telling your bank to send you  a password reminder and they own your bank account too.

#3 Posted by scamp115 (13 posts) -

Are we talking about your computer or PS3? How are you connecting to the internet? Are you using someone else's unsecured wireless network?

#4 Posted by scamp115 (13 posts) -

This is an incredible interesting move. My guess, Nintendo knows that they can sell their games when ever they want and make a ton of money on it. So they are getting out of the way so that third party publisher can have the best opportunity to sell their games during the holiday season. Unless of course they are trying to make room for the next Zelda game, which they mentioned that they want to have out by the end of the year. Either way, Super Mario Galaxy 2 and Metroid Other M before summer, F*** YEAH!!!!!!!

#5 Posted by scamp115 (13 posts) -

If you are looking for a great RTS you can't go wrong with Company of Heroes. The Gold version packages Company of Heroes and it's expansion Opposing Fronts together for $30. If you wait, you might be able to grab a deal on the package. Earlier this year I got it for $15. Make sure to always check in on Steam and see what their deals are, some of the weekend deals or midweek deals can be too good to pass up.

#6 Posted by scamp115 (13 posts) -
@creamypies: There are a couple difference with the Call of Duty franchise: 1.) It is expected each year that some major gameplay tweaks will be encorparated in release, and 2.) Those games come packed with content.

I think a lot of the negativity surrounding L4D2 comes from the fact that the original game was short on content, and didn't really have a story of its own to tell. Many reviews including Giantbomb's forgave the game its dirth of content because it was expected that Valve would deliver more content as time went on. This also might not be as big of an issue if people were interested in the progression of the story, but seeing as there wasn't a real story in L4D people don't need to see a continuance of it. Granted there is an overarching plot and you get glimpses of that through each of the disparate campaigns, but again there is little motivation to see a continuance of the story.

I think there is time for Valve to really impress us with the amount of new content that they have made for this game, but as of right now this game seems even weaker than an annual Madden game interms of improvements to gameplay and feature set. 
#7 Posted by scamp115 (13 posts) -

Price was an issue I was considering as I went to bed last night. Although they haven't announced a price for the game yet, the assumption seems to be that this is going to be a full retail game that sells for $50/$60 on the PC/X360 respectively. I figure that Vavle could clear up this issues by considering L4D2 as more of an expansion and selling it to gamers that have bought the original for twenty-five or thirty bucks. The only real problem I see with that plan is that it much more difficult to verify that an X360 owner actually owns the original without dealing with sending in the UPC's or something. I would be much more receptive of this game if I were only spending $75 total for both games and all the content that goes with them.

#8 Posted by scamp115 (13 posts) -

In light of all the announcements and all the amazing previews that came out of this years E3 I am very satisified. If there is one place that I have any true gripes, it is with Left 4 Dead 2. When rumors of this game being announced at E3 started flowing last weekend, I was skeptical. I thought that the timing wasn't write for a sequel and that Valve hadn't really delivered on their promise of DLC a la TF2 for the original. Even as I write this post I remain conflicted as to the necessity of this sequel so soon after the release of the original.


My first point of contention is the relatively minimal amount of content present in the original game. The original game shipped with a co-op and versus multiplayer mode spanning 4 champaigns (at least in the co-op mode initially), 8 total weapons (excluding environment weapons i.e. gas cans, mini-gun), 4 playable survivor characters, and 4 playable Infected characters. Call me crazy, but TF2 launced with 9 distinct  characters (they are really only 5 distinct character types in L4D), each with their own unique primary weapon, a slew of unique secondary weapons (sure the pistol and shotgun were repeated a couple times), ~8 maps, and a number of games types to change up the game experience. I am aware that this isn't a direct apples to apples comparison, but when you look at it, it seems that TF2 launched with more content and at a price point less than half of that of L4D  (and yes I realize that TF2 wasn't released as a standalone until a few months after the release of the Orange Box, but hang with me here).

This lack of content was acknowledge by most major blogs and game sites, but it was also dismissed as a minor complaint because everyone expected Valve to support this game in the same way that they have been supporting TF2. TF2 has been come something much more engaging and much more special through the continued support that Vavle has given to this game, and it is just a little disappointing that this hasn't happened for L4D. Judging a game based on content alone is a tricky thing to do as well. I know that I have spent tens of hours (not quite hundreds yet) playing L4D, so did I get my $50 bucks worth. Sure, when you compare that to other $50 retail games that only truly last for 12-20 hours. If you compare that to TF2 which I have spent at least 120+ hours on then L4D still comes up a bit lacking. 

While I may be peeved about this lack of continued expansion, I can understand why Valve is doing what they are doing. Chet Faliszek said in an interview (can't remember with whom at the moment) that when he presented this idea to Gabe Newell it was not accepted warmly. Gabe felt that that is not what Valve does, but he was willing to support the project if that was what the team was really passionate about doing. Gabe should be commeneded for his understanding of a team's passion, but I think it light of what we know maybe this game shouldn't have been a sequel. The way it happened I can't see a way to avoid doing this as a sequel simply because keeping such a large team working on a project that will be free add-on DLC can't be good for the bottom line. Vavle can afford the TF2 updates because it is a smaller team working on them and every time the release new DLC they see a bump in sales for the original game. With Left 4 Dead, you can't keep the entire team working on free DLC and expect to make other games that really help pay the bills.

Ultimately I really think that L4D should have been delayed to give the team some more time to really flesh most of these ideas, but then they would be able to give us the smaller DLC at a steady pace while working on another full scale game to keep the coffers full. As it stands Valve's biggest piracy deterant has been bucked so that the dev team can fullfil the dream they had for the original game.

It all comes down to:
The Good - We get a ton of L4D content just a year after the release of the original game and the developers get to create the game they wante to create in the first place.

The Bad - We get to buy all of this content again even though the original was lacking (although this can be debated).

The Ugly - Valve has to deal with a bunch of people that are going to complaing about anything and everything.

I'm still hoping that Valve will come out with something that can convince everyone (myself included) that this game is really worth the reinvestment and that are original investment in L4D was in vain.
#9 Posted by scamp115 (13 posts) -

I see no reason for the instruments to be incompatible. There is almost no excuse except for lazyness/pigheadedness by the developers on both sides. The instruments are transmitting a signal to the Wii everytime a note is pressed or hit. It shouldn't matter that the methods by which these signals get to the Wii are different. As long as each developer knows what these signals are going to be they should be able to code the game to recognize the other games instruments. Again I see no real technical limitation. It will come down to the developers reaching out to one another and taking the time to do it right.

#10 Edited by scamp115 (13 posts) -

I really think that it depends on how Nintendo markets the game. I think Resident Evil 4 sold itself on being essentially the director's cut of one of the best games in recent memory, and Metroid has legions of fans anyway. In all honesty, considering that there are now over 10 million Wii's in North American it is kind of sad that RE4 and MP3 didn't sell much more than 1.5 million. Red Steel is an interesting case because it was a launch title. I don't think it would have sold that well outside the launch period. I really hope that Fatal Frame 4 does well. I never had a chance to play any of the games in the franchise yet, but I am really looking forward to getting the pants scared off me. Although I may seem to be knocking the game a bit, I do think it will sell over a million. Let's just hope that Nintendo takes some of that marketing budget and muscle that they had for Wii Fit and apply it to this game.

  • 13 results
  • 1
  • 2