One of us has to make a There Shall Be War! 1 Year Anniversary banner. I am totally surprised. One full year and still going strong. Still bloody phoenix refuses to post here.
Not that I would say it's a bad thing.
All he would have to say is he doesn't like guns, and the weapons don't change enough to be worthwhile.
I don't get how someone can say something doesn't change something enough, but also be against change.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I put my shirt on one leg at a time, just like everybody else.
To be fair, BloodyPhoenix likely hasn't commented for 2 main reasons:
The idea isn't immediately objectionable or inherently broken (too OP'd) in some way, and there isn't a clear way for players to abuse it.
There is a considerable amount of thought that went into the concept and in developing the ideas.
What people should keep in mind is that the greater majority of the "Guidelines for a Good Suggestion" was posted (mostly) by BloodyPhoenix for a reason. He tends to challenge people/ideas that do not follow those guidelines and aren't clearly put down with a lot of detail and thought.
I, for one, appreciate it when he challenges me and makes me think deeper about my ideas or when he points out stuff that I didn't even consider, because it either makes the idea better, or it reveals the idea to not be quite as good as I might have originally thought.
So what you are saying is that he isn't trashing the topic because he can't?On another topic, like a topic that was the same topic that someone else made after, he said something along the lines of "as much as I hate this topic, it already exists here" and with the underlined here as a link to this topic.
So what you are saying is that he isn't trashing the topic because he can't?
On another topic, like a topic that was the same topic that someone else made after, he said something along the lines of "as much as I hate this topic, it already exists here" and with the underlined here as a link to this topic.
On the contrary... I'm sure he 'could' if he were interested in 'trashing' it, but since he doesn't like it already (as stated in another thread), posting inside the self same topic is in effect 'promoting' that topic, and giving it better visibility. If you don't like a suggestion (especially one that is largely popular to a number of others), you best strategy to dismiss it is to not participate, and hope people lose interest in the topic at hand. Negative participation will only encourage more interaction, which could in fact make a topic more popular. It is too easy to backfire by seeking out to 'trash' someone else's idea that is popularly supported.
Now, I'm not saying that he does that or not, he could just not care, and I really can't speak for him. But from a strategic standpoint, participation in this thread, either positive or negative will only call more attention to it, not less.
Dice knows how to make a game, and sadly EA knows how to make money.
If I could I would happily pay twice as much for Battlefield just to Dice, so they can buy themselves.
I know within the next game the money would've payed itself off with a more quality and cheaper game.
I wish game companies the size of EA never existed, much like COD they're ruining games by making them all horrible money grubbing scams.
However, games are still hundreds of times cheaper than most other forms of entertainment, and it's a good way to stay entertained.
Game companies like Mojang, and BI (Arma and DayZ) are my favourite ATM.
Although I'm seeing BI getting very big very quickly after the popularity of DayZ.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I put my shirt on one leg at a time, just like everybody else.
The modernization of FPS games is starting to make me want to stop buying fps games. They are all COD clones. Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Far Cry 3 with the multiplayer, and worst of all, halo has fallen to it as well. Halo 4 seems more like COD than all games in the series. The moment Halo 4 was released was when the halo series died in my mind. Now all fps games are sucking and all of the companies are money hoards. What these companies don't understand is that COD is a fanboy run franchise, so that is why they have so many players. 343 Industries betrayed me and a bunch of halo fans with this.
The modernization of FPS games is starting to make me want to stop buying fps games. They are all COD clones. Battlefield, Rainbow 6, Far Cry 3 with the multiplayer, and worst of all, halo has fallen to it as well. Halo 4 seems more like COD than all games in the series. The moment Halo 4 was released was when the halo series died in my mind. Now all fps games are sucking and all of the companies are money hoards. What these companies don't understand is that COD is a fanboy run franchise, so that is why they have so many players. 343 Industries betrayed me and a bunch of halo fans with this.
Gotta agree, I really enjoy games like Planetside 2 where the whole game is free, and while that means they make their money by selling upgrades to rich people, you can still get all that by playing a lot.
And my favourite thing of all is that all the teams have their own thing, TR which my friends and I play is the Red awesome military, strength in numbers faction with vehicles that have 15 seats, conventional bullets for weapons, but they do they trick nicely.
All their vehicles are way faster too.
In any modernised FPS, everything has to be available to everyone, I for one would enjoy elites vs spartans with both teams having correct weaponry.
In fact those halo reach Gamemodes were my favourite, one team elites with plasma weapons and the other spartans with human weapons.
Odly enough it was reasonably balanced, with elites being bigger targets but faster.
With a bit of extra work I think a lot of these games could appeal to all types.
I would like to see more hardcore gametypes on battlefield that force faction weapons, e.g Russian assaults with AK12's, US snipers with M40A5.
Things like lockons being capped per squad (I hate lockons) IRL they're made to give you greater range where you can be accurate, in Battlefield they become short range noob spamming devices.
But yeah, Halo 4 was all out terrible Campaign was repetitive, Multiplayer was too copycat.
Would've enjoyed if their "own spin" wasn't just futuristic COD.
I need to buy Red Orchestra 2, that game is the coolest looking game I've seen in a while.
The developer even wrote some stuff venting about COD fanboys, they complain about things like the realism in the running.
I can totally vouch for this, my friend once complained about how open and large the maps were in battlefield, I told him to run to the objectives and he asked me where they are.
/ramble.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I put my shirt on one leg at a time, just like everybody else.
Multiplayer was quite a bit of fun, I like master chief and the arbiter, but the change was nice.
If they added dual wielding, maybe have the story focus on chief and arbiter once again.
Would love to see the humans working with the covenant for a wee while.
Wasn't a fan of the promethians they made very annoying/ repetitive gameplay and very little sense.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I put my shirt on one leg at a time, just like everybody else.
Don't worry, we have gone off topic many times before. Also, I do have an idea that is on topic. How about casting magic spells at enemies? You have to be holding a spell book in your hand, and spell books would be found in mine shafts or from villager merchants. The book itself would have infinite durability, but you eventually run out of magic to cast and it is replenished by either sleeping or drinking a potion. Some spells would be fire, poison, slowness, healing(self), healing(everyone around you), weakness, yeah you get the idea. Also, in order to have access to every spell in the book, you must have the book for that particular spell and they do not stack. I dunno, that was just my two cents. I feel I had to throw some kind of idea out there.
Not that I would say it's a bad thing.
All he would have to say is he doesn't like guns, and the weapons don't change enough to be worthwhile.
I don't get how someone can say something doesn't change something enough, but also be against change.
- The idea isn't immediately objectionable or inherently broken (too OP'd) in some way, and there isn't a clear way for players to abuse it.
- There is a considerable amount of thought that went into the concept and in developing the ideas.
What people should keep in mind is that the greater majority of the "Guidelines for a Good Suggestion" was posted (mostly) by BloodyPhoenix for a reason. He tends to challenge people/ideas that do not follow those guidelines and aren't clearly put down with a lot of detail and thought.I, for one, appreciate it when he challenges me and makes me think deeper about my ideas or when he points out stuff that I didn't even consider, because it either makes the idea better, or it reveals the idea to not be quite as good as I might have originally thought.
On the contrary... I'm sure he 'could' if he were interested in 'trashing' it, but since he doesn't like it already (as stated in another thread), posting inside the self same topic is in effect 'promoting' that topic, and giving it better visibility. If you don't like a suggestion (especially one that is largely popular to a number of others), you best strategy to dismiss it is to not participate, and hope people lose interest in the topic at hand. Negative participation will only encourage more interaction, which could in fact make a topic more popular. It is too easy to backfire by seeking out to 'trash' someone else's idea that is popularly supported.
Now, I'm not saying that he does that or not, he could just not care, and I really can't speak for him. But from a strategic standpoint, participation in this thread, either positive or negative will only call more attention to it, not less.
Dice knows how to make a game, and sadly EA knows how to make money.
If I could I would happily pay twice as much for Battlefield just to Dice, so they can buy themselves.
I know within the next game the money would've payed itself off with a more quality and cheaper game.
I wish game companies the size of EA never existed, much like COD they're ruining games by making them all horrible money grubbing scams.
However, games are still hundreds of times cheaper than most other forms of entertainment, and it's a good way to stay entertained.
Game companies like Mojang, and BI (Arma and DayZ) are my favourite ATM.
Although I'm seeing BI getting very big very quickly after the popularity of DayZ.
Gotta agree, I really enjoy games like Planetside 2 where the whole game is free, and while that means they make their money by selling upgrades to rich people, you can still get all that by playing a lot.
And my favourite thing of all is that all the teams have their own thing, TR which my friends and I play is the Red awesome military, strength in numbers faction with vehicles that have 15 seats, conventional bullets for weapons, but they do they trick nicely.
All their vehicles are way faster too.
In any modernised FPS, everything has to be available to everyone, I for one would enjoy elites vs spartans with both teams having correct weaponry.
In fact those halo reach Gamemodes were my favourite, one team elites with plasma weapons and the other spartans with human weapons.
Odly enough it was reasonably balanced, with elites being bigger targets but faster.
With a bit of extra work I think a lot of these games could appeal to all types.
I would like to see more hardcore gametypes on battlefield that force faction weapons, e.g Russian assaults with AK12's, US snipers with M40A5.
Things like lockons being capped per squad (I hate lockons) IRL they're made to give you greater range where you can be accurate, in Battlefield they become short range noob spamming devices.
But yeah, Halo 4 was all out terrible Campaign was repetitive, Multiplayer was too copycat.
Would've enjoyed if their "own spin" wasn't just futuristic COD.
I need to buy Red Orchestra 2, that game is the coolest looking game I've seen in a while.
The developer even wrote some stuff venting about COD fanboys, they complain about things like the realism in the running.
I can totally vouch for this, my friend once complained about how open and large the maps were in battlefield, I told him to run to the objectives
/ramble.
And games that give you free content.
If they added dual wielding, maybe have the story focus on chief and arbiter once again.
Would love to see the humans working with the covenant for a wee while.
Wasn't a fan of the promethians they made very annoying/ repetitive gameplay and very little sense.