Thursday Next

I would be cool with people not being cool with me if I had $1.9million of their money. EDIT - Sometimes it worries me how much I think like I think my employer thinks, but then the payslip arrives and all the bad feelings go away...

The thing that makes me uncomfortable about Kickstarter is that there is precisely 0 onus on the person running the project to do anything with it. They can take your money, have a crack at the project and then shrug their shoulders and say "Well, that didn't work. Thanks for donating anyways." There's no contract formed between people who pledge and the people asking for money so if something doesn't go right there's no recourse should stuff just not work out the way the donee hoped. Even more disreputably, after failing they can then sell the project on to a publisher and make money out of the deal, and they still won't be obliged to send you a lithograph or whatever else they promised. In short, it looks to me like a bubble that is waiting to burst as it is a structure built on goodwill and honesty, both of which are (in my opinion) in short supply.

I'm sure the emergency services will be quite understanding. Any Aussies on the forum? I'm assuming they use 666.

Is there not a Kickstarter thread? Well now there is. Takedown is one of a few higher value Kickstarter projects raking in over $200k. There's something I don't get about these... That's 11 people who have paid $250 for Horse Armour. If EA had put a special Dog Tag for BF3 up for sale for $250 they would have been either laughed out of the room for being delusional or torn to shreds as greedy, good-for-nothing blood suckers. Is the warm fuzzy feeling Kickstarter seems to give people really worth that much money? Incidentally, I'm still waiting with curiosity for the first big Kickstarter flop. Once people learn that the money they are pledging can just disappear we might see them being a lot more choosy about what they back.

Hahaha, that's stupid. Seriously? You didn't like the ending? You feel betrayed by Bioware? Waaaa. It's totally as described on the Amazon site.

If you're willing to spend up to £1 / $1 your choices expand exponentially, I'd suggest you follow Amazon Kindle (@AmazonKindle) or Amazon Kindle UK (@KindleUK) where they have daily deals of books for $0.99 / £0.99. They also have regular sales where books will drop to under a dollar/pound (or sometimes £1.99 / $1.99 depending on newness or popularity). The sales are a great way to get into new series's I got The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and Game of Thrones for £1.99 each over Christmas. My first purchase was Flatland. One of those books that I'd heard about but never read. (Also one of my fave author's inspirations). I'm currently half way through the Night Watch series, loving them. No idea what to go on to next though. Might read through Ice and Fire again...

It's not so much the splash damage or power of the frag rounds, it's that the USAS did not suffer a drop in fire rate as every other shotgun did. That's why people aren't moaning about Frag rounds in general and are (or rather were) talking about USAS Frag in particular.

Ewwwww! Keys to fly? Are you sick in the head? Mouse is the only way to fly. Also, if your facing someone that good you either need a wing-man or someone in the stationary AA to help take them out. For most ground troops jets aren't a problem so getting foot soldiers with stingers taking an interest is unlikely.

I too am bored of Zombies. Especially when they are crow-barred in for no good reason (see RDR and Yakuza). Between the games that shouldn't have them and the games that should (Resident Evil, Dead Rising, Dead Island...) I've totally OD'd on the things. At least Infamous had enough dignity to use vampires as the monster classic spin-off. Still need to play that actually...

The article does point out that Bioware made a rod for their own backs by openly involving the public in the creative process. What they should have done is made clear that while they are interested in what the public think and they will take comments under advisement, Bioware will remain the owners of the story. In trying to win over the community they seem to have strayed into "design by committee" territory, which is a shitty place to be.

I'm not criticising anyone who does like them by the way. Like I say, it's a stigma that I can't over, the problem is with me, not the games or the people who like them.

I've never played Pokemon. Always considered it to be "for kids" (much like my current attitude to MLP:FIM). I'm sure that's not the case, but it's a stigma I can't get over.

Fair enough. Canabalt I can take or leave, but I really enjoyed Shank, so I'm looking forward to Shank 2 and Silent Hill is a classic. I've also discovered a couple of gems, most recently Costume Quest, which I might otherwise never have picked up. All in all, I think it's a great service.

Thanks. Just a pet peeve of mine. There's an interesting article on GI.biz http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-03-30-fanning-the-flames draws an amusing parallel between the people clamouring for a change to the story and Kathy Bates in Misery (imho they have a point).

No interest in free Shank 2, free Canabalt or free Silent Hill?

A lot of people vote the way people vote in the US. People with lots of money tend to lean towards Tories, as they (traditionally) supported individual prosperity over the redistribution of wealth amongst the people, those on lower incomes tend to go Labour, who were more about promoting the welfare state. My family are traditional Labour voters, I was when I was a student, now I'm more Tory leaning. I'll agree that both parties are much more in the centre so it's more about picking and choosing the financial policies that suit me. For example, any government that will lift the IHT threshold to something sensible and change the SDLT rules so that it applies to the money over the threshold and not the whole sum will get my vote every time.

For a country that has nothing really wrong with it (compared to Arab-Spring states or new democracies) and where elections are relatively low-key compared to the circus that is the US presidential race, I think a 2/3 turnout is pretty swish.

That's not the way it works, I've said this plenty of times before. Studios make their own decisions as to artistic direction and story. Unless you work for either the studio or publisher involved or can produce a quote from either one to that effect please stop saying "X makes Y do Z."

Unfortunately, there are always going to be some people who believe that customers are stupid. So that culture of "spin" isn't going anywhere. Hopefully EA can bring the quality and content too so that the spinners have less to do. This Sim City thing does make me wonder though.

I love the super special editions with things in them. I bought the GT5 one for just under £100, the God of War trilogy for £80ish. The Assassin's Creed White Edition and Brotherhood Codex Edition for about £60. I also acquired the Crysis 2 Nano Edition through shady means... But yeah, generally I'll spend a fair bit on games. Being in the industry I do get a fair few freebies slung my way too which is quite the bonus.

It should still be optional. This is a stupid move imho.

@Yant: That's not the be all and end all though. It's doing it and leaving the customer happy about it. When I bought the Sazh DLC for FFXIII-2 it was in a large part because I really enjoyed the game. It was almost like tipping the waiter. I still haven't played the Sazh DLC, but I don't regret the purchase at all. @Battra: A good point, I'd be interested to see what the lack of availability of used games did to sales (I'd be equally curious to see what effect a magical piracy free world would have).

I'm not sure if you're reading what I'm writing the way I'm intending for it to be read. Here's a point by point summary: 1. Not everyone at EA likes Online pass. In fact some are dead against. 2. Not everyone at EA thinks "Used Purchase = Bad". 3. Some people at EA see people who have purchased used games as customers who are equal to first game purchasers and should be placed on an equal footing with regard to access to online gameplay. 4. Some people at EA feel that the goal should be to engage all (including second hand) consumers and get them to want to buy DLC by making great games, rather than to hobble the experience of second hand purchasers and force them to buy an Online Pass. I'm not sure which part of that is pissing you off, but I'm not getting drawn into a row about it so you can drop the aggressive tone.

Dunno, guess I'm just not invested enough in the franchise to get all nerd-ragey about it. Turtles was fun but I definitely outgrew it. Something that didn't really happen with Transformers.

@Yant: "EA can't have people playing EA games without paying tribute to EA." You make it sound like it's a weird or somehow "wrong" attitude to have to want to get paid for your work. @Ethan Precisely, there's a number of people within EA who see used consumers in just that way. EA may not get the initial cut of the base game, but to be honest, we probably make more money out of someone who buys second hand and gets all the DLC, than buys new and doesn't get any DLC. (I have no numbers to back that up and if I did, I wouldn't be able to share them).