The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
I can't find a single review on this thing. I THINK it is made by 3000AD and, consequently, 'Dr.' Derek Smart, also known to be at the heart of the greatest flame war that ever graced Usenet. The King of Internet-Trolldom. That is, if he wasn't serious.
Anyway, it looks interesting. Huge space and land to explore in some Freespace-sounding style of play.
Description:
Open world. You can build shit. Land and space combat. Apparently you can fly vehicles in space, land on a planet and build a base there, all in first person. Sounds cool.
Anyone try the demo? I didn't see it when I spotted it last night.
BTW, not sure if this thing is worth making anything more than a shitty op.
LewieP, just check out Derek Smart on wikipedia.
If you decry his games, he will descend from on high with a fiery vengeance. Basically, he has repeatedly acted like a dick, although in recent time he has been silent.
I haven't purchased the game for myself, but I have been watching the steam forums for the game semi-actively, and I can say that he hasn't changed a bit. He will delete, argue, and shoot down any negetive comment about his game on the forums. I'm surprised the link to Gamespot is even there - And with further reading, he informs everyone in the forums that Gamespot just hates him.
There are also a few minor problems with the game and he just informs everyone (When it's posted on the forums.)'I know of it and it's not going to be fixed for awhile.' and he keeps switching back and forth on the possiblity of DLC. Things like 'More terrian features like fish underwater.' that he expects people to pay for. The game is ugly enough, and I'm not going to be paying a developer to make it shiny. It's also $40 on steam.
[quote=Quote:
Originally Posted by freemansailor View Post]
Wait til we see reviews from IGN, GT, G4TV then we will decide.
People who make their buying decisions based on someone else's personal opinions are patently foolish. This has been proven to be the case time and time again. How many games got glowing reviews, but were rubbish? How many games got less than stellar reviews but turned out to be gems?
Thats what demos were made for. Reviews (books, tv, movies, games, whatever) are based on someone's personal opinions and not meant to be any sort of endorsement whatsoever. Any gamer - who still has his gamer card - knows this. A well written review gives you more ammo to make up your own mind.
Nice try. Do try not to derail this thread again because quite frankly we can do without the hassles of deleting your caustic posts/threads and which have proven to serve absolutely no purpose whatsoever - dispite the posting rules being pointed out to you time and time again. I know its hard, but try, 'mkay? Please?[/quote]
Malkor on
0
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
edited September 2009
I love the ideas Derek Smart has for his games. I just wish he wasn't the one making them.
I played in the beta, got in a vehicle and drove through the wall of a building.
I uninstalled it shortly after, because it didn't have collision detection until I hit some random building. Granted, it was a beta... but still... It was a beta without collision detection for the most part.
Graphics didn't really appeal to me either, but it could just be that it's not my type of game.
Edit: I should not multitask when posting.
DudeMaYn on
0
FandyienBut Otto, what about us? Registered Userregular
[quote=Quote:
Originally Posted by freemansailor View Post]
Wait til we see reviews from IGN, GT, G4TV then we will decide.
People who make their buying decisions based on someone else's personal opinions are patently foolish. This has been proven to be the case time and time again. How many games got glowing reviews, but were rubbish? How many games got less than stellar reviews but turned out to be gems?
Thats what demos were made for. Reviews (books, tv, movies, games, whatever) are based on someone's personal opinions and not meant to be any sort of endorsement whatsoever. Any gamer - who still has his gamer card - knows this. A well written review gives you more ammo to make up your own mind.
Nice try. Do try not to derail this thread again because quite frankly we can do without the hassles of deleting your caustic posts/threads and which have proven to serve absolutely no purpose whatsoever - dispite the posting rules being pointed out to you time and time again. I know its hard, but try, 'mkay? Please?
[/QUOTE]
The funniest part about those quotes is that the thread's title is "Game Reviews" and the original post has links to reviews of the game.
"The sandbox mode does not require objectives because that’s the whole "sandbox" point. You create your own objectives. e.g, if you want to go take on any enemy base - just show up and see what happens. The AI is in full force and effect. So you can decide to take out their barracks, base or whatever."
Man I don't know, that sounds pretty awesome. It would be even cooler if it was a persistent MMO world and you had different factions that are responsible for creating their own infrastructure and determining their own objectives.
"The sandbox mode does not require objectives because that’s the whole "sandbox" point. You create your own objectives. e.g, if you want to go take on any enemy base - just show up and see what happens. The AI is in full force and effect. So you can decide to take out their barracks, base or whatever."
Man I don't know, that sounds pretty awesome. It would be even cooler if it was a persistent MMO world and you had different factions that are responsible for creating their own infrastructure and determining their own objectives.
If only someone could turn that idea into reality and then put it on Steam so I could download it, then release like seven free expansions or something I dunno.
"The sandbox mode does not require objectives because that’s the whole "sandbox" point. You create your own objectives. e.g, if you want to go take on any enemy base - just show up and see what happens. The AI is in full force and effect. So you can decide to take out their barracks, base or whatever."
Man I don't know, that sounds pretty awesome. It would be even cooler if it was a persistent MMO world and you had different factions that are responsible for creating their own infrastructure and determining their own objectives.
If only someone could turn that idea into reality and then put it on Steam so I could download it, then release like seven free expansions or something I dunno.
Keep in mind that the physics work exactly how Derek Smart pictured them in his head (according to his posts on the Steam forums).
So when you drive that jeep into a wall and get flung back through the air like a pinball, it's not a bug. That's Derek's vision! There are no bugs in this game!
"The sandbox mode does not require objectives because that’s the whole "sandbox" point. You create your own objectives. e.g, if you want to go take on any enemy base - just show up and see what happens. The AI is in full force and effect. So you can decide to take out their barracks, base or whatever."
Man I don't know, that sounds pretty awesome. It would be even cooler if it was a persistent MMO world and you had different factions that are responsible for creating their own infrastructure and determining their own objectives.
Dude, all of Derek Smart's base ideas are really cool.
But every single piece of the execution is pure shit. His games are awful buggy complicated impossible to understand messes.
I played in the beta, got in a vehicle and drove through the wall of a building.
I played the demo and just casually pressing some of the buttons on my joystick made the game crash to desktop.
RPS has a real love-affair with the dude for some truly unfathomable reason. Even though whenever the comments inevitably turn sour they need to delete most of his posts for trolling alongside the rest of them.
I mean, when the article about his game demo came up, one of the first people to try it came back saying it crashed. Instead of talking it through to find out the problem, Smart basically called the guy an idiot and said it was his own fault. The game couldn't have crashed for any reason to do with them because they'd tested it thoroughly and had no more bug reports left in their database.
EDIT: Ah yes, here we go. I can't find his original response to the guy, because, surprise, RPS had to edit it and replace it with the following:
[You'll have to be nicer than that here, Derek - our readers are largely expressing honest commentary based upon their experience of the game rather than simply taking a pop at you. We want civil and constructive discourse from both sides. Rest assured we have been deleting and will continue to delete the genuinely nasty reader comments, of course. Thanks, RPS]
Later on however, we get this little gem:
Sorry Derek. Although I’ve never particularly enjoyed your games, I haven’t found reason to bash them, either.
However, your statement that “There are NO crashes in the game. Not one. In fact, there aren’t any bugs left in our tracking dB. So whatever that was about, check your system” is particularly arrogant. I can only hope that it was in jest.
Arrogant? Maybe. But so what? I can be as arrogant as I want to be but at the end of the day I stand by my statements. If I know – for a fact – that there are no bugs in the game, then I have the right to say so.
Why should I accept the postings of some seemingly anonymous non-entity on a board? Can you vet that person? Vouch for them? Do YOU have access to their machine? So what? Its better to take the word of some Internut at face value while lambasting the developers?
No, it wasn’t a jest. I was serious because those are the facts.
We’ve had people ignoring the DirectX 9 update requested by the installer, pressing “NO”, then come tell us that the game won’t run. We check their system? And of course the last time they updated DirectX, Clinton was president.
I never underestimate the power of gamers to royally fuck up otherwise simple things. So if its not in my game – and I can’t reproduce it – chances are, its your fault. Prove me otherwise, and I’ll fix it and move on with my life.
Then of course there's:
I tried the marine mission…I ran, spotted an enemy, killed
him, another appeared, I got killed and it crashed…hooray, seems like a
good old 3000ad game
There are NO crashes in the game. Not one. In fact, there aren’t any
bugs left in our tracking dB. So whatever that was about, check your
system.
Also, all enemies come from somewhere other than thin air. So another
didn’t just “appear”. He may have only just appeared to you, but since
they intercept in groups and pairs, you probably noticed the other guy
first.
Yes he truly is claiming that his games come perfect and completely bug free. "Those are the facts". Grief.
Yeah, I don't actually know why the RPS guys seem to love him. I've not played any of his games, but the combination of widespread consistent negative opinion from a wide variety of sources, and his general conduct have made me unwilling to even give him the benefit of the the doubt.
Yeah, I don't actually know why the RPS guys seem to love him. I've not played any of his games, but the combination of widespread consistent negative opinion from a wide variety of sources, and his general conduct have made me unwilling to even give him the benefit of the the doubt.
You'd think from reading and constantly deleting his comments they'd realise he's actually just a giant egotistical nutjob. o_O
Say what you want about Derek Smart, at least he's passionate at what he does.
Other developers are very passionate about their work and their games. Most don't go around calling their customers idiots just because they say your product crashed, and it couldn't have crashed because that's impossible your product was perfectly made.
So this thread got me to read over the BC3K thing, and a ghist of the flame war that transpired
hoooooly pooooop, on the one hand yea, some people are just antagonistic towards him, on the other, there is little excuse for treating customers that way (also, having a Ph.D means a genuine contribution to human knowledge, I dislike the idea of someone going around toting one when they in all likelihood do not have it)
Davoid on
0
DietarySupplementStill not approved by the FDADublin, OHRegistered Userregular
I think he's like a version of Peter Molynaux with worse ideas, and less capability to deliver on those ideas, and less idea of how to not come across as a prick from time to time.
I think he's like a version of Peter Molynaux with worse ideas, and less capability to deliver on those ideas, and less idea of how to not come across as a prick from time to time.
Peter Molyneux, for all his faults, is infinitely superior to D. Smart in all possible ways. That doesn't amount to much, of course. It's like saying that something smells better than poop that was actually vomit eaten by a diseased goat before turning into poop.
Reading his posts on usenet, one of his favourite things is to suddenly portray his opponent as a "worthless nobody" (paraphrasing). I was especially tickled when he used this tactic on a medical doctor.
A shame the film Zoolander hadn't been created during the height of it
"What have you done, Derek? Nothing! You've done nothing!"
"The sandbox mode does not require objectives because that’s the whole "sandbox" point. You create your own objectives. e.g, if you want to go take on any enemy base - just show up and see what happens. The AI is in full force and effect. So you can decide to take out their barracks, base or whatever."
Man I don't know, that sounds pretty awesome. It would be even cooler if it was a persistent MMO world and you had different factions that are responsible for creating their own infrastructure and determining their own objectives.
If only someone could turn that idea into reality and then put it on Steam so I could download it, then release like seven free expansions or something I dunno.
I think his ideas are great, but he lacks the $$$ and manpower to actually make it happen beyond an alpha that is buggy as hell and looks like shit.
It's not just money and manpower. His attitude is an insurmountable obstacle. You can't ever make a good game if you make a buggy piece of shit like that last one and then proceed to declare it's a perfect jewel.
I think he's like a version of Peter Molynaux with worse ideas, and less capability to deliver on those ideas, and less idea of how to not come across as a prick from time to time.
Peter Molyneux, for all his faults, is infinitely superior to D. Smart in all possible ways. That doesn't amount to much, of course. It's like saying that something smells better than poop that was actually vomit eaten by a diseased goat before turning into poop.
Absolutely, I meant he has all of Peter Molyneux's flaws, only worse, and none of his (obvious) redeeming qualities.
Posts
LewieP, just check out Derek Smart on wikipedia.
If you decry his games, he will descend from on high with a fiery vengeance. Basically, he has repeatedly acted like a dick, although in recent time he has been silent.
Sadly, his game design skills have not improved.
nooooooooo WHAT HAVE YOU DONE
There are also a few minor problems with the game and he just informs everyone (When it's posted on the forums.)'I know of it and it's not going to be fixed for awhile.' and he keeps switching back and forth on the possiblity of DLC. Things like 'More terrian features like fish underwater.' that he expects people to pay for. The game is ugly enough, and I'm not going to be paying a developer to make it shiny. It's also $40 on steam.
Reading him defend his game will be fun though.
People who make their buying decisions based on someone else's personal opinions are patently foolish. This has been proven to be the case time and time again. How many games got glowing reviews, but were rubbish? How many games got less than stellar reviews but turned out to be gems?
Thats what demos were made for. Reviews (books, tv, movies, games, whatever) are based on someone's personal opinions and not meant to be any sort of endorsement whatsoever. Any gamer - who still has his gamer card - knows this. A well written review gives you more ammo to make up your own mind.
Nice try. Do try not to derail this thread again because quite frankly we can do without the hassles of deleting your caustic posts/threads and which have proven to serve absolutely no purpose whatsoever - dispite the posting rules being pointed out to you time and time again. I know its hard, but try, 'mkay? Please?[/quote]
Derek Smart
Derek Smart!
You should sleep with one eye open tonight
I uninstalled it shortly after, because it didn't have collision detection until I hit some random building. Granted, it was a beta... but still... It was a beta without collision detection for the most part.
Graphics didn't really appeal to me either, but it could just be that it's not my type of game.
Edit: I should not multitask when posting.
The funniest part about those quotes is that the thread's title is "Game Reviews" and the original post has links to reviews of the game.
huh.
Man I don't know, that sounds pretty awesome. It would be even cooler if it was a persistent MMO world and you had different factions that are responsible for creating their own infrastructure and determining their own objectives.
If only someone could turn that idea into reality and then put it on Steam so I could download it, then release like seven free expansions or something I dunno.
I played the demo and just casually pressing some of the buttons on my joystick made the game crash to desktop.
Yeah i wish somone would make that game one day. If only.
So when you drive that jeep into a wall and get flung back through the air like a pinball, it's not a bug. That's Derek's vision! There are no bugs in this game!
Dude, all of Derek Smart's base ideas are really cool.
But every single piece of the execution is pure shit. His games are awful buggy complicated impossible to understand messes.
RPS has a real love-affair with the dude for some truly unfathomable reason. Even though whenever the comments inevitably turn sour they need to delete most of his posts for trolling alongside the rest of them.
I mean, when the article about his game demo came up, one of the first people to try it came back saying it crashed. Instead of talking it through to find out the problem, Smart basically called the guy an idiot and said it was his own fault. The game couldn't have crashed for any reason to do with them because they'd tested it thoroughly and had no more bug reports left in their database.
EDIT: Ah yes, here we go. I can't find his original response to the guy, because, surprise, RPS had to edit it and replace it with the following:
Later on however, we get this little gem:
Then of course there's:
Yes he truly is claiming that his games come perfect and completely bug free. "Those are the facts". Grief.
Can anyone help me out with that particular nugget of information from Mr. Smart?
well you see, the thread counts on this game
exponential
but this game doesn't run on apples, so no cores
you see? genius
I see, thank you.
You'd think from reading and constantly deleting his comments they'd realise he's actually just a giant egotistical nutjob. o_O
Other developers are very passionate about their work and their games. Most don't go around calling their customers idiots just because they say your product crashed, and it couldn't have crashed because that's impossible your product was perfectly made.
hoooooly pooooop, on the one hand yea, some people are just antagonistic towards him, on the other, there is little excuse for treating customers that way (also, having a Ph.D means a genuine contribution to human knowledge, I dislike the idea of someone going around toting one when they in all likelihood do not have it)
So was John Wayne Gacy, and yet I can't figure out who is more batshit insane.
Peter Molyneux, for all his faults, is infinitely superior to D. Smart in all possible ways. That doesn't amount to much, of course. It's like saying that something smells better than poop that was actually vomit eaten by a diseased goat before turning into poop.
A shame the film Zoolander hadn't been created during the height of it
"What have you done, Derek? Nothing! You've done nothing!"
My mind is blown.
It's not just money and manpower. His attitude is an insurmountable obstacle. You can't ever make a good game if you make a buggy piece of shit like that last one and then proceed to declare it's a perfect jewel.
Absolutely, I meant he has all of Peter Molyneux's flaws, only worse, and none of his (obvious) redeeming qualities.