jkjudgex

It's a little awkward that CCP would react to this, when they outright encourage scamming and griefing with in-game policies and rules...

I enjoy EVE, but, seriously the game is meant to be no-holds-barred... that's how it works. You blow someone up and take their stuff, you scam people, you war-dec small-population hi-sec mission runners and destroy everything they field. That's EVE...

So one of them convos you with a sob story about suicide... so what? It's probably just a lie anyway. It also has no place in a video game, especially EVE.

CCP is completely hypocritical if they punish this player for doing what they encourage and enable. Sets a bad precedent, too. Now all we have to do to get rid of the baddies is come up with a sob story about a wife and a revolver in our mouth, and suddenly they are forced to be super-nice to us.

"mob" doesn't bother me because it's short for "mobile" and comes from the pre-MMO days of MUDs and such... earlier MMOs stayed very true to the better aspects of MUDs... games like EQ and DAOC... but, nowadays I'm pretty sure most people don't know why we use the word "mob".

1) I enjoy Squad Deathmatch in BC2, though it isn't my favorite, nor is Rush. I prefer conquest, because it's harder to camp/grief.

2) PC FPS games are vastly superior to console, sorry console kids... consoles are better for racing and fighting, but not FPS, RTS, or MMO. In the current age anyway, I think consoles and PCs will sort of be merged soon. There's no reason your console can't use a mouse and keyboard for gaming, word processing, and web browsing.

3) BF3 should be a logical extension of BF2, meaning that the maps will be designed for open/strategic warfare instead of choke-point action shooting like Bad Company. This makes all the difference in the world. Bad Company 2 is great and all, but, I played it for about a year and am tired of it. I played BF2 for 5 years and still have a lot of fun with it.

4) Cost of PC - I see a lot of whining about the cost of a PC. The truth is that you get a lot of value out of the extra money you spend. You get the higher end graphics and gaming, the better network capabilities, and all of the useful software, from business applications like excel, to school stuff, to creative applications like photoshop and fruityloops... and on top of all that you could learn to program, write web software, and write mobile phone apps all on that PC... learn different operating systems... I mean, a TON of benefits...

And you're still thinking "$500 is a lot of money" but you're gonna go out and spend $350 on something that doesn't even really do half of that (and not nearly as well), all because it has a controller and plugs into a TV (things you can do with your PC, too), or has 17 "exclusive" titles that are almost all 3rd person clones of one another with a different guy in armor on the cover?

You probably already have a PC anyway, or are going to have to have one.

@Xcrucio There's a reason for that. It is superior. Mouse + Keyboard has been PROVEN to be a better interface, and the graphical capabilities of the PC are obviously superior. Better visuals, better controls, more flexibility with input and display devices... yeah... it's much better. I have consoles. I never buy games that come out on PC on consoles.

@Seffrid
1) DAOC is much, much more complex, rewarding, and unique than you give it credit for in your post. To this day, there is not a single more rewarding PVP/RVR system available that can be enjoyed by a few friends banding together and committing to some goals. EVE Online is the only close experience and requires much, much more dedication than DAOC did. "Meaningful" PVP is essentially non-existent - still - to this day... by "meaningful" I mean, you fight for land and a structure that YOUR GUILD / team gets to claim and use, that confers VERY TANGIBLE BENEFITS.

Capturing a keep, capturing a relic, defending that relic, gaining bonuses, getting a nice plot of land to gain XP bonus on, opening Darkness Falls for your realm, and engaging in rewarding siege warfare with large numbers of enemy players, not restricted to "scenarios" or "instances"? Nothing else does it so well.

2) Subscription prices did increase. As a matter of fact, JUST as World of Warcraft was getting hot, DAOC decided to increase the subscription price by about a dollar. I considered this suicide for them, and, it turns out that the game did steadily decrease in number since then... increasing the price is stupid, you're paying for very little.

3) F2P exists because everyone is starting to realize that you are paying for next to nothing from an MMO dev. $15 a month, for a couple of database records and a 3k/sec tops connection? There's just no way to justify it... "content creation this, content creation that" ... sorry but no, if we didn't have to BUY EXPANSIONS, you'd have a point, but every piece of meaningful content comes with a $30-50 price tag in ADDITION to the monthly fees.

Even if a user were to stay connected 24h/day, $15 a month is far too much to charge each individual. I can host that level of bandwidth, with a backed up database, for 1000 users simultaneously for well under $1000 a month, and if I charged each of them $15 a month, that'd be $15,000... the other $14,000 into development? It's just ludicrous greed is what it is, and people will pay for it because of the perceived value. you don't just see a couple records in a database as your characters...

F2P is more honest (or at least, has the capacity to be)... You pay for what you use. Play DDO... you don't like one of the modules? Don't buy it. You want to XP slow? Don't buy XP boosts. You only played in January and March of one month? You might spend $8. You only played in January and March on WOW? You paid $45.

I'm not picking on WOW here - I'm talking about any pay MMO. None of them offer anything above and beyond. The battlefield and call of duty games keep a database record for you - in perpetuity - and ask you for no more than the initial cost of the game. - They even operate a large number of servers and don't ask for extra cash for that (albeit relying mostly on private ones).

Furthermore, many pay to play MMOs don't even offer a trial period. Rift - buy now banners being a hilarious example. "Yes, I want to buy this game because it is named Rift, that's all I've got to go on before I'm grabbing a credit card, maybe some screenshots". Forget that.

I say this having played EVERY MAJOR MMO since DAOC. I've got toons in all of these games, and I currently don't subscribe to any, because frankly, they're all the same thing... though I really WANT an MMO to come out that is more like DAOC - I would pay for it.

They had the crown when they created battlefield 1942 and Battlefield 2... two of the best games of all time.

A bunch of dumb console jockeys hopped on that Call of Duty franchise, though, and, money talks.

The BF series is really good gameplay, but it's not really publicized or advertised correctly/enough. It's for gamers with a brain who also want some action.

Also, BF2 is Xfire game #6 or 7 after more than 5 years since release... that's pretty solid, considering it's a PC only title.

As a Wii and PC owner, and a fan of hardcore games (FPS me, you'll die... if I have a mouse, anyway...) I have a quick answer for Capcom.

You didn't release your main titles on Wii, and then you claim it's hard to capitalize on Wii's market? No SFIV, No Resident Evil 5, and where's Megaman? Instead, we get "decent" on-rail shooter versions of resident evil games... a resident evil 1 remake that uses gamecube style controls instead of the awesome controls you used in Resident Evil 4...

The only success capcom has brought to the table on the Wii, for me, is Resident Evil 4, which was my favorite version of the game, and one of the few games that really takes advantage of the wiimote/nunchuk setup CORRECTLY.

This would be like a giant shoe company selling awesome tennis shoes that everyone loves in all the other markets, and then crying about low revenues in North America where they only sold flip flops.

Yeah, the Wii is low on processing power... but it didn't stop the guys who made Ghostbusters, nor you from making Resident Evil 4, nor anyone else who made a decently successful port...and those ports don't even carry the clout of a title like RE5 or SFIV.

I'd have bought both of those games day one.

http://www.judgex.com

Actually, the first strong attack on Call of Duty games has been around for a very long time.

It's called Battlefield 2.

And if you don't/haven't played it, you really aren't an FPS gamer worthy of the mouse and keyboard in my book.

I've got Modern Warfare. I really liked the game... it was solid. Beat single player in a night, and still play multiplayer from time to time.

One problem... it's really just Counterstrike Source again with a bit more polish and a cool advancement system. It's awesomely smooth, and I can really lay down some punishment in free for all.

However... it's just a distraction. The most rich gameplay in an online FPS still resides in Battlefield 2. The reason I say this is because it actually forces you to use your brain instead of just your eyes and mouse.

You have to strategize for your team while fighting, land, sea, and air. Not helicopters that some lame kid calls in by pressing 6. Helicopters piloted by 2 living, breathing enemy players. You'll face tanks, APCs, etc. And if you don't like that, play Infantry Only mode, which is STILL actually more rewarding to play than Modern Warfare.

There's a small learning curve to the game, true, and the action isn't 100% as fast and furious at all times because the maps are a lot bigger (and better). But the addition of ACTUAL strategy (which flag to take actually matters, your commander matters, your squad leaders matter, reviving fallen teammates matters, etc etc), in squad based play, really makes the difference.

Once you're good at fighting infantry in BF2, you still need to learn how to be a good chopper pilot, attack helo pilot, jet pilot, tank driver, APC, engineer, anti-tank, etc. Too much for you? That's why I was saying you don't deserve that mouse.

To conclude, BF2 is still king of the PC FPS market to real gamers. Sure, call of duty sells tons of games, and is great, but it doesn't strike on that true richness that legendary games such as Starsiege Tribes and Battlefield 2 strike on.

http://www.judgex.com/

Shauk has it dead on.

I was once a pretty solid Gamestop customer... but, over time you start to notice that if you are buying any 2 or 3 items, you would have saved $10-20 at Wal-Mart or even more Online or at a real store...

$5 on the Wii Motion Plus was a foolish move, as were many other device pricing movies they had. Also, selling your old games on EBay nets you like 200% more cash than GIVING them to Gamestop at less than $10 a pop on average.

Oh, and, making the PC gaming section a tiny island with one side was probably a bad idea, too. Best Buy carries more PC games, and they aren't even a game shop.

Not 100% their fault though, the game industry for PCs isn't doing so well, and stocking 80% shovelware from PS3, Wii, and XBOX360 has to hurt profits as people simply use Metacritic or similar source to identify what's trash and what's not before stupidly sinking $50..

I would imagine you could run a store that earned more profit by not even stocking C-grade titles and below.

www.judgex.com

In this post, blogger doesn't know left from right.

3rd Spartan from left would be x...x...o...x, while the guy wearing the skull mask is actually the second Spartan.

www.judgex.com