Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Civ was my offline game (Score 1) 295

by Nitar (#32150846) Attached to: <em>Civilization V</em> To Use Steamworks

Steam has a tendency to lock accounts that log in from multiple IP addresses. 'Cause, you know, that's a crime.

Hahah! Spoken like someone who has never used Steam. As others have pointed out... this is a flat out lie. I log in from my computer at work, my laptop, and my home PC. I've never had this problem. Not one time. Not only that, but the Steam cloud appears to ENCOURAGE the use of Steam on multiple computers. I love that Torchlight was updated to use this. Being able to use the same saved games on my laptop and my home PC is fantastic.

Comment: Re:Aion will Flop (Score 1) 256

by Nitar (#29071209) Attached to: On Transitioning To an Asian-Style MMO, Such As <em>Aion</em>

You negelct to realize that every day brings WoW closer to it's death. You know how many people jsut get so damn bored of it already? Do you think eternal life is possible, even for a given product?

Not that I completely disagree with you, but I think you underestimate the brand loyalty that Blizzard has built up with WoW.

On one hand, what you said is irrefutable (in fact it applies to every multiplayer game). I could be reading into your statement a bit, but if you are implying that WoW is going to be gone or diminish significantly any time soon I think you are quite mistaken. Look at some of the more popular early MMOs, such as Everquest. It's still around, and it had nowhere near the subscriber number that WoW has.

That said, I think everyone gets bored of WoW, but they seem to keep a good flow of content to keep their subscriber numbers very high. With (last I read...) 12.5 million subscribers, I think it will be around for a very VERY long time.

I'm a huge fan of WoW (if you can't tell by my comments), however, I am also a huge fan of PC gaming. I love competition and innovative products, which is why I'll definitely be giving Aion a shot. I really hope it does succeed.

I think what companies need to stop comparing to WoW. WoW is an anomaly. It has subscription numbers that dwarf any MMO, so far. The important thing is figuring out what numbers will make an MMO a success (generate a profit), and shoot for those numbers. If you hit those, then do what you can to keep improving the product in order to maintain/grow your subscriber base.

Comment: Re:Surprised? (Score 1) 313

by Nitar (#28217815) Attached to: Hulu May Begin Charging For Video Content

Trying to make your comment seem more valid by saying "most of us" doesn't fly. Should I make my comment seem more valid by saying, "Most of us prefer to skip time wasting commercials?"

If you read through the comments here, there are other people that feel the same way I do. That said, and as others have also pointed out, if you want "free" + commercials just grab an antenna. Broadcast TV should suit you just fine.

Anyhow, if you'll read my comment, you'll notice that I don't have cable. Almost all TV shows I watch come from Hulu. The exception being a show that I watch on ABC. So as you can see, I'm all for "free" content as well.

My whole point was that it really isn't free. It may be free to you, but someone is footing the bill. If they start charging money for a subscription, the only way I would pay is if it was for content without commercials. And yes, I would be happy to pay for content in order to skip commercials... as long as the price is right.

Comment: Re:Surprised? (Score 1) 313

by Nitar (#28214609) Attached to: Hulu May Begin Charging For Video Content

The only thing I'm seriously surprised about is that you thought they were giving away their content for free. It sounds to me like you may want to watch a show or two on Hulu before commenting.

Hulu has commercials. Not as many as cable (thank goodness), but they do have commercials. They are given money in exchange for those commercials.

Now, if what you were trying to say is that they were giving content for "free" to the user. I'd only partially agree with that. When I used to have cable, I used TiVo to skip commercials. I own no time shifting devices or software for skipping commercials on Hulu. I would much rather pay for content than have to suffer through inane commercials.

Now, if Hulu starts charging subscription fees, AND removes commercials, that would be completely fine with me. If they keep commercials AND charge a subscription, they are no different than a cable company, or satellite (with the exception of maybe offering an al a cart subscription). In which case, I'd probably sign up for satellite where I could watch programming commercial free again.

Comment: Re:Release should be fine (Score 2, Interesting) 410

by Nitar (#28118203) Attached to: Zune HD Unveiled, Set For Fall Release

I currently use a Zune, after getting hooked on the Zune pass subscription. Sorry... but as far as I'm concerned I don't really care what casing surrounds my hard drive/flash storage media. At the end of the day I just want to listen to music, podcasts, and audiobooks. The Zune does all three of these things just fine. The whole "it's cool to have an Apple" thing is lost on me.

That said, the only thing Zune has going for it is the Zune Pass. I can buy tunes off of iTunes, if I couldn't find the tracks on Zune or Amazon. However, I CAN'T use my Zune pass on my iPod.

If the Zune pass goes away, I'm not sure how MS can hope to even keep up the pitiful competition that they currently have. (If you can even call it competition)

HD Zune might be okay, but like I said before, I just want it for Audio. I could care less about all the other stuff.

Comment: Re:I would prefer... (Score 2, Insightful) 183

by Nitar (#27955859) Attached to: Video Game Adaptation In the Works For <em>A Song of Fire and Ice</em>

Well, I read Gaiman's article, and if that's the approach an author wants to take, then so be it.

At the end, Gaiman states, "...the simple and unanswerable truth: George R. R. Martin is not working for you."

If Martin is not working for the reader, who IS he working for? Who pays his salary, and more to the point, who pays his royalties? In the end, it IS the reader. Without us spending our money on his books, there is no publishing deal and no royalties.

If I go with Gaiman's line of reasoning, then my response is this. Fine, go ahead, write your stories. I'll only purchase them when you finish the entire series, and not a second before that. What motivation could I possibly have to read half of a series and not get to the ending? It just tells me that Gaiman and Martin take their readers for granted.

If more readers decide to take this approach, then here's a clue BOOK ONE WILL NEVER SELL! It's not hard to figure this out. If book one does not sell, the publisher is not going publish book two.

Therefore, while it is debatable that Martin does not work for us, the reader is buying the book(s) in an unfinished series in good faith that the series WILL in fact be finished. One could go further and expect some communication should there be an inordinate delay.

At least I know where Martin (and Gaiman) stand here. I will not purchase any more of the Song of Ice and Fire books until the series is complete. It just sounds to me like Martin got enough money, and he doesn't feel like finishing it. If that's not the case, here's a clue, let your readers know!

Comment: Re:How about DRM? (Score 1) 243

by Nitar (#27535237) Attached to: GameStop Selling Games Played By Employees As New

Right... but let's say the GameStop employee decides to "check out" the new copy of FFXI. Doesn't that essentially lock anyone else out of using that particular copy of the game?

In the PC world that is absolutely the case. If I purchased a copy of WoW, which I have, you use up that unique key. You can resell the disk, but it will be completely worthless to the buyer (unless of course you sold your account to go along with it.)

Comment: Re:Does it matter??? (Score 2, Insightful) 243

by Nitar (#27531843) Attached to: GameStop Selling Games Played By Employees As New

Lay off the FUD, if you do have this happen, then you will return it and get a new copy of the game.

You're missing the point... Now this person has to drive home, pop the game in, enter the code, find out it's broken, drive back, argue for a new copy (which might not be new), drive home and repeat the cycle?

The point is, if the game is sold as being NEW, then it should be NEW.

The last time I bought a gutted game at GameStop, the manual had grease and food remnants all over it. It also already had a saved game. That was the last time I purchased anything at GameStop.

Comment: Re:No, I'm not surprised. (Score 2) 429

by Nitar (#27508217) Attached to: Apple Shifts iTunes Pricing; $0.69 Tracks MIA
I stand corrected. Came over here to post my findings, and you've already found something as well.

I just saw a similar article today on ars technica.

It looks like other music services are affected by this as well. From the article this line sums it up, "...pricing changes that the labels have managed to negotiate into their contracts with digital music distributors." The blame is squarely on the record labels in this case.

Comment: Re:No, I'm not surprised. (Score 1) 429

by Nitar (#27500345) Attached to: Apple Shifts iTunes Pricing; $0.69 Tracks MIA
The pricing structures that I'm talking about are Apple prices and... let's call them... sane prices.

Here's a quick example, since you asked:
4.0 GB of RAM (2x2GB) SO-DIMM, 1066MHz DDR3 (PC3-8500)
Apple store $200
Newegg (highest price) $69.99

Feel free to find more on your own. Try comparing hard drives if you'd like. I haven't checked myself and maybe I'm wrong, but I have a hunch you'd find another good example. I hope you understand what I mean by Apple's pricing structures.

Now... how about providing a link regarding your statement about the record labels deciding what price Apple was going to set for music in iTunes? I mean, if you're going to call someone out, certainly you are prepared to back up your own statements as well...

Comment: Re:No, I'm not surprised. (Score 2, Insightful) 429

by Nitar (#27499455) Attached to: Apple Shifts iTunes Pricing; $0.69 Tracks MIA

Not a big fan of logic I take it? Easier to try to tear someone down by claiming brand hatred than it is to prove your point, eh?

If it was the labels 'forcing' this price down Apple's throat, it seems awfully strange that Amazon and Zune are unaffected. It occurs to me that since iTunes sells MORE music than any other music service, that they would have more bargaining power, and would be one of the last services to be 'forced' to change their pricing structure.

No... based on Apple's past pricing structures, I'd be more inclined to believe that Apple is just taking the opportunity to pad their wallets even more. Don't get me wrong... they're perfectly within their rights to do that. Heck, more power to them!

As long as I still have alternatives, I could care less about the people duped into paying the Apple tax.

"Those who will be able to conquer software will be able to conquer the world." -- Tadahiro Sekimoto, president, NEC Corp.

Working...