User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/7/2016 11:25:17 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Pretty much a large group of guys that (barely) stay within CoC that play to ruin the game for other people. Trolling, baiting, etc to use the games mechanics against the targeted player. Piloting in front of the player while they are firing to get a bounty on them, etc. CIG is trying to put stuff in the game to reduce the ability to be an asshat but it'll still happen. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not being an MMO guy, WTF is "goon" anyway? Players who specifically play to raise hell for other players, or what? Pretty much a large group of guys that (barely) stay within CoC that play to ruin the game for other people. Trolling, baiting, etc to use the games mechanics against the targeted player. Piloting in front of the player while they are firing to get a bounty on them, etc. CIG is trying to put stuff in the game to reduce the ability to be an asshat but it'll still happen. With the instancing CIG has planned (and 90% NPC to 10% PC ratio), it shouldn't be too tough to avoid griefers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2016 12:54:01 AM EDT
[#2]
Besides CR could say these guys are assholes, NPCs now off contracts on them
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2016 1:18:47 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Besides CR could say these guys are assholes, NPCs now off contracts on them Yep. I remember one of the Q&A sessions where he addressed the notion of cheap ram shipt -- which the goons were advocating/bragging about. This was the strategy of purchasing loads of LTI Auroras and using them in waves to ram capital ships to death. CR said that this sort of behavior would result in ship replacements coming slower and slower, and eventually in the revocation of the LTI under insurance fraud provisions. There's also the 'ganker instances' algorithm. One wonders if there's a goon algorithm in the works that'll have all the goons spawn in only with other goons. We'll get to see how cannibalistic they are. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2016 1:24:49 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep. I remember one of the Q&A sessions where he addressed the notion of cheap ram shipt -- which the goons were advocating/bragging about. This was the strategy of purchasing loads of LTI Auroras and using them in waves to ram capital ships to death. CR said that this sort of behavior would result in ship replacements coming slower and slower, and eventually in the revocation of the LTI under insurance fraud provisions. There's also the 'ganker instances' algorithm. One wonders if there's a goon algorithm in the works that'll have all the goons spawn in only with other goons. We'll get to see how cannibalistic they are. Oh god, if only they would allow a free float cam into that universe for spectators. It would be glorious. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2016 7:09:44 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's also the 'ganker instances' algorithm. One wonders if there's a goon algorithm in the works that'll have all the goons spawn in only with other goons. We'll get to see how cannibalistic they are. Heh. Respawn used this to great effect on the first Titanfall. Cheaters didn't get banned, they just got their own special lobbies to compete in aimbot MLG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2016 4:32:45 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
With the instancing CIG has planned (and 90% NPC to 10% PC ratio), it shouldn't be too tough to avoid griefers. They are moving away from the old instancing mechanic and will be able to have insane numbers of players in an area (1000+). |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2016 6:40:13 PM EDT
[#7]
Loved the new ATV. Need a Navy guy to tell us how accurate the deck crew were.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2016 7:29:00 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They are moving away from the old instancing mechanic and will be able to have insane numbers of players in an area (1000+). Let's hope they change their minds on that. The small instancing was posed as a feature rather than a limitation, and a feature that specifically set it apart from EVE and the goonswarm nonsense practiced there. Is there really a purpose to thousands of players being in the same instance that doesn't involve the big corps drowning out the little guys? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2016 7:48:21 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Let's hope they change their minds on that. The small instancing was posed as a feature rather than a limitation, and a feature that specifically set it apart from EVE and the goonswarm nonsense practiced there. Is there really a purpose to thousands of players being in the same instance that doesn't involve the big corps drowning out the little guys? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
They are moving away from the old instancing mechanic and will be able to have insane numbers of players in an area (1000+). Let's hope they change their minds on that. The small instancing was posed as a feature rather than a limitation, and a feature that specifically set it apart from EVE and the goonswarm nonsense practiced there. Is there really a purpose to thousands of players being in the same instance that doesn't involve the big corps drowning out the little guys? Those thousand person instances could be millions of cubic kilometers. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2016 7:53:36 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Let's hope they change their minds on that. The small instancing was posed as a feature rather than a limitation, and a feature that specifically set it apart from EVE and the goonswarm nonsense practiced there. Is there really a purpose to thousands of players being in the same instance that doesn't involve the big corps drowning out the little guys? When they first described the small instancing idea it sounded like they were trying to find a silver lining to a limitation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2016 7:55:04 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Those thousand person instances could be millions of cubic kilometers. Kharn This, and from the numbers and speeds they are talking about, it could take 10-15 minutes just to cross a solar system to get to a jump point in one system. Considering how many star systems they are planning on, that is an obscenely huge volume of space. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/8/2016 11:20:20 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Let's hope they change their minds on that. The small instancing was posed as a feature rather than a limitation, and a feature that specifically set it apart from EVE and the goonswarm nonsense practiced there. Is there really a purpose to thousands of players being in the same instance that doesn't involve the big corps drowning out the little guys? Not to be a dick but there's no way in hell small scale instancing is a positive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2016 12:26:05 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This, and from the numbers and speeds they are talking about, it could take 10-15 minutes just to cross a solar system to get to a jump point in one system. Considering how many star systems they are planning on, that is an obscenely huge volume of space. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Those thousand person instances could be millions of cubic kilometers. Kharn This, and from the numbers and speeds they are talking about, it could take 10-15 minutes just to cross a solar system to get to a jump point in one system. Considering how many star systems they are planning on, that is an obscenely huge volume of space. If we say "millions" = "50 million" just for the sake of argument, 50 million cubic kilometers would get you a cube of space that stretches a little under a quarter of the way from Earth to Mars. Even if systems operate at 1/4 scale for convenience, that wouldn't get you from Earth to Mars.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2016 12:47:43 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If we say "millions" = "50 million" just for the sake of argument, 50 million cubic kilometers would get you a cube of space that stretches a little under a quarter of the way from Earth to Mars. Even if systems operate at 1/4 scale for convenience, that wouldn't get you from Earth to Mars. Yeah I know, but for a ship that is ~30m long that is a ton of space. From what I've read from CIG, they are thinking Q drive will be the equivalent of .2-.35c at most. With a compressed 10:1 scale, it's almost 10au (based on the Port Olisar map) it's still going to be about 40 minutes to cross the system at .2c from jump point to jump point. Per CR, the Stanton system alone (not sure if this is 2.4 or 3.0) is roughly 400 quadrillion cubic km of space. Honestly, I'm curious as to how they're going to swing both having massive environments without making it boring as holy fuck to be travelling through them. Don't get me wrong, travel shouldn't be instantaneous, but being able to point at the X jump point, start quantum drive, and go get a pizza is kinda not good gameplay. It'll be interesting to see how they balance it. I'd also like to take a step back and simply say 'holy fuck' to the playable volume (even if 99% of it is open space) that they've been able to put out. I can't think of any game that is that fucknormously huge without midpoint loading. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2016 7:55:42 AM EDT
[#15]
Something tells me gaming reality will set in well before launch and we'll get Q-drives that can go faster for the cost of more dilithium, and possibly a few ounces of "cannae take it" when you gotta get somewhere fast.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2016 10:08:56 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah I know, but for a ship that is ~30m long that is a ton of space. From what I've read from CIG, they are thinking Q drive will be the equivalent of .2-.35c at most. With a compressed 10:1 scale, it's almost 10au (based on the Port Olisar map) it's still going to be about 40 minutes to cross the system at .2c from jump point to jump point. Per CR, the Stanton system alone (not sure if this is 2.4 or 3.0) is roughly 400 quadrillion cubic km of space. Honestly, I'm curious as to how they're going to swing both having massive environments without making it boring as holy fuck to be travelling through them. Don't get me wrong, travel shouldn't be instantaneous, but being able to point at the X jump point, start quantum drive, and go get a pizza is kinda not good gameplay. It'll be interesting to see how they balance it. I'd also like to take a step back and simply say 'holy fuck' to the playable volume (even if 99% of it is open space) that they've been able to put out. I can't think of any game that is that fucknormously huge without midpoint loading. Random spawning space anomalies, pirate attacks, mineable asteroids, etc. Depending on your ship, nothing says you have to just sit there. A half hour trip on any ship with an industrial station could probably be put to good use. As long as you trust your auto-pilot, lol. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2016 2:56:31 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When they first described the small instancing idea it sounded like they were trying to find a silver lining to a limitation. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Let's hope they change their minds on that. The small instancing was posed as a feature rather than a limitation, and a feature that specifically set it apart from EVE and the goonswarm nonsense practiced there. Is there really a purpose to thousands of players being in the same instance that doesn't involve the big corps drowning out the little guys? When they first described the small instancing idea it sounded like they were trying to find a silver lining to a limitation. I agree. It was my biggest fear with the project. We'd have all this really cool stuff but wouldn't ever be able to have epically large battles due to instancing restrictions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/9/2016 3:12:48 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I agree. It was my biggest fear with the project. We'd have all this really cool stuff but wouldn't ever be able to have epically large battles due to instancing restrictions. Same, I thought it would be the big let-down that really hurt the game, even though that was pretty much the way it was going for years and people should have been aware of it. CR lamented it himself, saying massive space battles was his dream and that it was out of reach due to client limitations, but I guess they've overcome some of those. I don't know what the current state is, I haven't heard the new definition of "instance." |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2016 12:46:58 PM EDT
[#19]
I really hope the cap ships actually pack a punch against each other and the battles don't become a broadside to broadside slug fest.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/11/2016 12:47:37 PM EDT
[#20]
I really hope the cap ships actually pack a punch against each other and the battles don't become a broadside to broadside slug fest.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2016 12:28:28 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I really hope the cap ships actually pack a punch against each other and the battles don't become a broadside to broadside slug fest. Totally opposite here, I hope they're hard as hell to take down...depending. If it's a 1v1, and the caps can pour power into their facing shields, then slug away, great...but in a 2v1 I would see it ending quickly, unless the 1 ship turtled, killing nav and weapons and just keeping shields up. Perfect time for a boarding party. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2016 12:33:44 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Totally opposite here, I hope they're hard as hell to take down...depending. If it's a 1v1, and the caps can pour power into their facing shields, then slug away, great...but in a 2v1 I would see it ending quickly, unless the 1 ship turtled, killing nav and weapons and just keeping shields up. Perfect time for a boarding party. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I really hope the cap ships actually pack a punch against each other and the battles don't become a broadside to broadside slug fest. Totally opposite here, I hope they're hard as hell to take down...depending. If it's a 1v1, and the caps can pour power into their facing shields, then slug away, great...but in a 2v1 I would see it ending quickly, unless the 1 ship turtled, killing nav and weapons and just keeping shields up. Perfect time for a boarding party. I'm thinking it'll be more of like two WWII subs trying to line up a shot on each other and fighting for position before firing the mains. Hell, the main gun on the Bengal IS the size of a fucking Idris. Gotta get that shot lined up though. One on one, I can see fights getting drawn out because neither side can line up a kill shot and having to use broadsides to soften. Beyond that, I think Twelvepack nailed it. I do think CAP flights will be a deciding factor though. One good torpedo can turn your Vanduul Kingship into the Bismark turning in circles after all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2016 12:46:18 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Totally opposite here, I hope they're hard as hell to take down...depending. If it's a 1v1, and the caps can pour power into their facing shields, then slug away, great...but in a 2v1 I would see it ending quickly, unless the 1 ship turtled, killing nav and weapons and just keeping shields up. Perfect time for a boarding party. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I really hope the cap ships actually pack a punch against each other and the battles don't become a broadside to broadside slug fest. Totally opposite here, I hope they're hard as hell to take down...depending. If it's a 1v1, and the caps can pour power into their facing shields, then slug away, great...but in a 2v1 I would see it ending quickly, unless the 1 ship turtled, killing nav and weapons and just keeping shields up. Perfect time for a boarding party. I'd be cool with something like Battlestar Galactica's cap ship on cap ship battles, with them staying at a respectable but not extreme distances and hammering each other with missiles and guns while trying to get an edge outside the killzone with fighters. Although granted SC has nothing as large (although the Bengal comes close) or heavily armed/armored as a Battlestar, but still, the concept could scale down well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2016 12:53:35 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd be cool with something like Battlestar Galactica's cap ship on cap ship battles, with them staying at a respectable but not extreme distances and hammering each other with missiles and guns while trying to get an edge outside the killzone with fighters. Although granted SC has nothing as large (although the Bengal comes close) or heavily armed/armored as a Battlestar, but still, the concept could scale down well. Um, have you seen the UEE Retribution class superdreadnought?   They datamined it from the gamefiles. Afterwards, it was confirmed by SC staff as being in the game as a class of superdreadnought for the UEE.
Compared to the terraformer on Broken Moon Next to a Bengal And the STS turrets are the small suckers poking out on the right side (Bengal main gun) and those are the small guns on it. The Bengal has a single set of 130mm railguns. This fucker has them in batteries down all sides. 
Let alone that the 'gap' in the forks is probably a massive gun if you follow CR's games. He loves doing that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2016 1:01:54 AM EDT
[#25]
Smaller capital ship battles (destroyer and below) will probably be decided by torpedo volleys as the ships maneuver to avoid shots from rail guns.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2016 1:07:13 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Smaller capital ship battles (destroyer and below) will probably be decided by torpedo volleys as the ships maneuver to avoid shots from rail guns. That does make me wonder how things in the persistant universe will go. Figure they have said there will be a few derelict Bengals hidden around to be found and fought over, with the possibility of players possibly fixing with massive effort. The 130cm railgun turret is supposed to punch through anything destroyer sized or smaller if it hits. Then again, that would be hilarious. Goonsquad shows up with 3-4 Idrii and just get their shit pushed in by the main gun.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2016 8:18:52 AM EDT
[#27]
Do the cap ships have torpedo launcher tubes? I don't recall it ever being mentioned.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2016 2:15:20 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do the cap ships have torpedo launcher tubes? I don't recall it ever being mentioned. Yes |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/12/2016 2:21:31 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do the cap ships have torpedo launcher tubes? I don't recall it ever being mentioned. Yes. Although the Javelin may not have many tubes because of its focus on STS guns. I'm not sure what the current stats for the cap ships are, other than the Polaris having 4 tubes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2016 12:53:48 AM EDT
[#30]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2016 4:10:18 PM EDT
[#31]
Well, I can say I'm disappointed as hell. No SQ42 in the holiday stream, a new LTI ship sale, and Star Marine kinda looks like it. Let alone the worst stream they've ever done. Wrong mics, green screen freak outs, etc. 2.6 is pushed back to the 22nd at minimum.
ill admit it this one has kind of shaken my confidence in CIG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2016 6:00:06 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, I can say I'm disappointed as hell. No SQ42 in the holiday stream, a new LTI ship sale, and Star Marine kinda looks like it. Let alone the worstnstrwam they've ever done. Wrong mics, green screen freak outs, etc. 2.6 is pushed back to the 22nd at minimum. ill admit it this one has kind of shaken my confidence in CIG. Agree. Reddit is melting down and I'm very disappointed. Not only does this scream of expectation management, it's a huge red flag in terms of project management. From Chris' oh-so-planned letter saying not to expect any SQ42 stuff, he pretty much admits they wasted time on the vertical slice for cit-con and then did absolutely nothing with any of it. So far in this quarter he's promised SQ42 footage, 2.6 in November, and 3.0 this year. We'll be lucky to get one of those, and it'll only be a PTU release and not live. Yes, very, very disappointed indeed. On the plus side I got my SQ42 hoodie today and it's great quality. If only the game would turn out as such. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2016 6:41:56 PM EDT
[#33]
From reading the stream chat and such, I bet CIG pushes 2.6 to PTU very shortly to stop the bleeding. The technical difficulties with the stream only made the lack of content more obvious.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Do the cap ships have torpedo launcher tubes? I don't recall it ever being mentioned. The Polaris has 4 tubes, fixed forward facing. The Idris has a 10-shot reloading launcher turret. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2016 7:42:08 PM EDT
[#34]
I'm disappointed but not surprised.
CR is known to be overly optimistic with projected dates. Add the scope and ambitious technical requirements, and my guess is we might be waiting another 5 years for the "final" product. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/16/2016 9:52:40 PM EDT
[#35]
2.6 PTU open to first wave, check your settings on the website if you've submitted a few bug reports previously, I didn't receive an email but was able to copy my account and start downloading.
Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2016 12:16:12 AM EDT
[#36]
Just got home to see my PTU invite. Live stream sucked ass but this makes up for it. I'm pretty sure this is damage control.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2016 1:58:09 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm disappointed but not surprised. CR is known to be overly optimistic with projected dates. Add the scope and ambitious technical requirements, and my guess is we might be waiting another 5 years for the "final" product. That's software development for you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2016 11:39:55 PM EDT
[#38]
 Star Citizen: The Scale of Things to Come |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/17/2016 11:43:18 PM EDT
[#39]
My Polaris brochure came in the mail today.
I expect the pages will be well worn by the time I finally get to fly this thing.
Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 12:58:31 AM EDT
[#40]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/18/2016 12:19:23 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My Polaris brochure came in the mail today. I expect the pages will be well worn by the time I finally get to fly this thing.
http://i.imgur.com/WD8MxZk.jpg Kharn Does it say what number your Polaris is? I couldn't find it in the picture, but I remember them saying we would get the hull number of our polaris in the brochure. Also, is the date sent postmarked anywhere on the envelope? Just moved to a new place and even though I changed my address with CIG a couple of weeks ago, I'm not sure I got it changed in time since USPS is so slow... Thanks 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 11:23:42 PM EDT
[#42]
People on Reddit seem to have forgotten all about the live stream debacle with the release of 2.6. I personally don't really care about the live stream and don't understand why people are so angry about it. It reeks of entitlement. To me it's just a nice little thing they do for the community. I don't feel like I'm owed anything with it.
I realize there are going to be delays and I'm more interested in 3.0 than Squadron 42. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 11:27:00 PM EDT
[#43]
Got a 2.6 invite a bit ago. Debating if I want to download it or not, as I'm not sure if I can even run it on my 5mb/s connection.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 11:35:29 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Does it say what number your Polaris is? I couldn't find it in the picture, but I remember them saying we would get the hull number of our polaris in the brochure. Also, is the date sent postmarked anywhere on the envelope? Just moved to a new place and even though I changed my address with CIG a couple of weeks ago, I'm not sure I got it changed in time since USPS is so slow... Thanks Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
My Polaris brochure came in the mail today. I expect the pages will be well worn by the time I finally get to fly this thing.
http://i.imgur.com/WD8MxZk.jpg Kharn Does it say what number your Polaris is? I couldn't find it in the picture, but I remember them saying we would get the hull number of our polaris in the brochure. Also, is the date sent postmarked anywhere on the envelope? Just moved to a new place and even though I changed my address with CIG a couple of weeks ago, I'm not sure I got it changed in time since USPS is so slow... Thanks No mention of my hull number. Postage was electronic, so no cancellation stamp. USPS should be able to forward your mail, I've never had a problem with their system for moving. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2016 11:49:45 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People on Reddit seem to have forgotten all about the live stream debacle with the release of 2.6. I personally don't really care about the live stream and don't understand why people are so angry about it. It reeks of entitlement. To me it's just a nice little thing they do for the community. I don't feel like I'm owed anything with it. I realize there are going to be delays and I'm more interested in 3.0 than Squadron 42. The livestream was really bad before you even consider what they'd hinted we would see. I think the 2.6 PTU shows they've made some decent progress, there are still a number of bugs to fix and VOIP is very desperately needed for team combat to be fun in Star Marine, but overall, it's a good improvement. If only it weren't months behind schedule. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2016 4:15:51 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The livestream was really bad before you even consider what they'd hinted we would see. I think the 2.6 PTU shows they've made some decent progress, there are still a number of bugs to fix and VOIP is very desperately needed for team combat to be fun in Star Marine, but overall, it's a good improvement. If only it weren't months behind schedule. Kharn I think I've figured out why EA keeps delivering shitty, half done games. Some people would rather that than wait a few months. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2016 4:17:33 AM EDT
[#47]
All bitching on my part about the livestream aside, I am more than willing to give CIG time. I know how all that works, I was just amazed at how everything ended up as a clusterfuck when it should have been a big thing. *shrug*
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2016 4:28:40 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All bitching on my part about the livestream aside, I am more than willing to give CIG time. I know how all that works, I was just amazed at how everything ended up as a clusterfuck when it should have been a big thing. *shrug* I have yet to watch the livestream since my current internet won't support it. But I do accept that the presentation tech should be working during a show like that. What I take umbrage at is the complaints about them not having the product out on a schedule they have always said is tentative |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2016 5:48:42 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have yet to watch the livestream since my current internet won't support it. But I do accept that the presentation tech should be working during a show like that. What I take umbrage at is the complaints about them not having the product out on a schedule they have always said is tentative I think the takeaway is that, next year, do live stream BEFORE open bar office party. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/20/2016 7:20:12 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think I've figured out why EA keeps delivering shitty, half done games. Some people would rather that than wait a few months. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The livestream was really bad before you even consider what they'd hinted we would see. I think the 2.6 PTU shows they've made some decent progress, there are still a number of bugs to fix and VOIP is very desperately needed for team combat to be fun in Star Marine, but overall, it's a good improvement. If only it weren't months behind schedule. Kharn I think I've figured out why EA keeps delivering shitty, half done games. Some people would rather that than wait a few months. It's not that development takes a while, it's that they hyped each of the streams and then had to fall back to alternate demos. They should have set more attainable goals or not hyped specific features to be shown. Three live streams in three months is a very rapid pace, especially if they want to show new content at each. I think they need to make the holiday one informal, no presentations or new content, just various offices in a bracket match, CR playing pick-up games and handing out freebies to those that kill him, a few skits, etc. Kharn |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
