Paradise City, FL
Last Active
Favorite Role
Currently Playing
DAOC - Uthgard
  • Guild Wars 2 - We Talk Daybreak with Andrew Gray & Mike Zadorojny -

    Argh, such a bad title and introduction to an article.

    I literally thought I was going to read an article about a game from Daybreak "Studios."

    Could not make sense about "Path of Fire" or Living World's either. (Mind was stuck on the Daybreak thing)

    I don't follow GW2 so I skimmed to the bottom wondering if there was a game actually being developed by "Daybreak Studios" called Path of Fire., perhaps even a new expansion to GW1.

    I'll give this story the coveted "Worst article of 2017" award
  • From an old vet ... this looks like the real deal

    Kyleran said:

    [...] But going on radio silence for long periods of time, never the right approach, unless you plan on suddenly announcing, great news guys, we'll be launching beta 1 next Tuesday...surprise!

    I think that it's the exact opposite of radio silence. They're allowing us to directly see (and be part of) the progress through updates, newsletters, live streams, Alpha testing, forum posts, etc.

    They even created a page showing extremely detailed information about where they are and what is left to do before we get into Beta 1.

    Also they've recently added a new card for the Dragon Circle:

    "As a Backer, I want to enter a siege scenario, complete objectives, and have the outcome factor into my player's progression."

    All the items from this card so far are marked as completed. 

    Old smoke and mirrors trick. Doesn't matter if they have a list of items to complete, what needs to be added is when do they project each task / all tasks to be done.

    I told Mark long ago I don't care how busy they've been, nor how many tasks remain, tell me when you believe they'll be done.
  • From an old vet ... this looks like the real deal

    Gynthazi said:
    Kyleran said:
    meddyck said:
    Kyleran said:
    Maybe your donation will permit them to publish a delivery schedule.

    I gave them mine over 4.5 years ago and am still waiting.

    Software isn't like a package shipped from a warehouse to your home. A delivery schedule wouldn't be worth the pixels used to publish it.
    As someone who has successfully delivered software for almost 30 years I can assure you this is not true, especially this far into the release cycle the cone of uncertainty should be quite small.

    Unless of course something has happened to push timelines way back which CU hasn't been open about. 

    Maybe they just want it be a surprise. 
    For someone who donated 4.5 years ago if you were paying attention you'd see they had a massive reason for being delayed. Quite frankly i'm glad they did what they did and even through it set them back a good year and a half or so, i'm hoping it will be worth it. 

    We must be hearing something soon.. maybe another couple months? the weekly updates have more and more content in them I feel.
    Yep, I know full well what happened,  doesn't excuse the lack of a schedule today.
  • UPDATED: Bungie Responds to Destiny 2 Ban Rumors

    Ban all the cheaters, permanently, from all platforms...

    If only that was possible   :|
    They will always find a way back.
    You raise a good point, if their approach actually results in significantly less cheating, perhaps the collateral damage of some small subset of players (innocent or otherwise) being banned justifies the means.
  • Starting Cities

    Just because something is minor doesn't mean it should be done away with or is useless.  This is not a logical response:

    Kyleran said: "if it's a minor hindrance then it's mostly useless and there should be no major issue letting them start together or get together quickly."

    Kyleran said: "But you could be right, perhaps its not the game for them, and I'm sure the developers don't need their money.  "

    Yep, it has always been advertised as a niche game and not for everyone.  Here is an article stating Brad's opinion.  The part relevant to this discussion starts in paragraph 2 and goes from there.

    The "relevant" part is right here, where Brad clearly states this is a game focused on getting people adventuring together again.

    Not very likely they will purposely support mechanics which might inhibit this in the name or lore or unnecessary challenge.

    "We've decided to attract gamers who love to team up with each other and take on the AI -- cooperative gamers who want more than session based games but to work together in a truly persistent environment. We've decided to go after people who want to explore and experience vast handcrafted worlds with compelling storylines and quests. We've targeted the online gamer who when they experience something emotionally intense would rather experience that with other people -- that, to them at least, experiencing challenges and even overcoming them together and as a team provides for muchmore memorable shared experiences"