| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (35)

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 8:01PM Mistur said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"All you *need* to sufficiently run a computer is one monitor."

That maybe true for yourself but not me. I need three monitors to do my job, having a second PC is a *want* but having three monitors for my job is a *need*. So just because you can sufficiently run your computer with 1 monitor doesn't mean I can.

However I do agree that companies supporting the hardware I have bought is a *want*. But why shouldn't I want them to support the hardware that I own? I spent good money on that hardware and want to use it, and if it means getting to game to at my machines full potential who could blame me?

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 8:50PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Want all you want ;P
but boycotting an indie studio because they haven't yet taken the time to see to your super niche want is ridiculous. KYLE...
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 9:02PM Mistur said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't even know who this kyle guy is nor do I want to. And as someone who works in the games industry the last thing I am going to do is boycott a indie studio seeing that I spent 4 years working at a Foundation 9 studio. But hey think I am this Kyle guy all you want :D
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 9:04PM Mistur said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Also forgot to mention I have put about 40 hours into the game in the last week and love it. Just wish I could use multiple monitors.
Reply

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 11:27PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This guy is just pissed off he can't have it is own way. Not to mention he's just a effing idiot in the first place. Why would you use a multi-monitor setup like this for gaming? All those thick black pieces of plastic going down your screen? WOW annoying. How about...buy a nice 1080p TV if you want a huge screen, and resize your windows accordingly. I'm all for a multimonitor setup, but when it gets to the point of it being the exact same dimensions AND resolution as a 46" television, just buy a effing television!!! And this guy calls himself a hardcore gamer? WHAT A TOOLBAG!

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 11:41PM Marked said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
In my opinion Global Agenda has complete right to limit their game however they want. Same as any gamer has complete right to boycott the game for any reason and share that reason, valid or not.

However, the "look to supporting the technology" is complete PR bull. Global Agenda uses the Unreal Engine 3 which supports on-the-fly changeable FOV (and has for several generations). Global Agenda would simply have to change a flag or two in it's settings and it would support pretty much any FOV they wanted. Now sure their UI might screw up, but the engine itself supports it with zero change.

Posted: Feb 18th 2010 11:53PM Interitus said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The irony of the 'unfair' picture and the lack of coverage compared to STO as it was getting closer to release is not lost on me.

Posted: Feb 19th 2010 2:24AM CalebG said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
To quote what Kyle said:

"And let's face it, if that poor bastard setting up the turret in the video would have had some Eyefinity loving, that purple dude with the sword would not have cut his head off."

That is HR's arguement against it. The advantage while not game breaking (others might have a totally different opinion of course), is still a considerable an advantage.

It's like using night vision goggles to infiltrate an enemy base, and complaining that they have their lights on because they know you have night vision goggles.

There is a difference between expecting an advantage to be given because of a unique set up, as to expecting a game to be supported on your set up, which they have already stated they will eventually.

They are just probably trying to weigh the issue and perhaps find a way to support it without it being too significant of an advantage.

Posted: Feb 19th 2010 3:34AM Psychotic Storm said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
in an era that you can have logitech G series and have pre-scripted sequences bind at keys change mouse sensitivity on the fly, or any other "gaming" rated equipment you cannot claim to protect from unfair advantages because of hardware, it has long ago been out of any programs control.

Anyway I would really would wish they allowed in-game the option to choose witch monitor you want to use.

Posted: Feb 19th 2010 9:45AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yes, but you can't expect a company to drop what they're doing to support that sort of thing. People who buy peripherals, download addons, all that sort of thing, they do that of their own volition and without taxing an (presumably) already overtaxed development team. Kyle is asking for exactly that kind of support and calling foul when they don't immediately abide, so fuck him and his one-percenters. My two monitors are for work, not necessarily for play.
Reply

Posted: Feb 19th 2010 1:16PM Psychotic Storm said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Actually I have yet to read the article and see who that Kyle is, or what he is saying.

I agree that he is way over the top by what you discuss.
Reply

Posted: Feb 19th 2010 4:57AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"And let's face it, if that poor bastard setting up the turret in the video would have had some Eyefinity loving, that purple dude with the sword would not have cut his head off."

No the Recon guy saw a target of opportunity and took it. Saying that you should be given the ability to see practically around corners isnt demanding that the company stop dictating what hardware you use, it's demanding the ability to milk every last advantage out of his hardware setup to remove skill or luck from any given equation.

Such advantages because you dropped more cash on your rig isn't hardcore. It's cheating by any other name.

Posted: Feb 19th 2010 8:17AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Better hardware = advantage, whatever the kind of hardware. It's always been and will always be. So the unfair advantage never held the road. It was said for a long time already when widescreen resolutions came out, and it was also said at the dawn of PC gaming where a graphic card was not even required.

I think the devs fully have the right not to support a technology and invest their resources elsewhere. It sucks, but it is perfectly understandable. But spouting lame excuses is what ticks me off. It doesn't mean that I will boycott the game because I can't use my fun shiny toy, but I also have the right to be disappointed.

Also, compared to the cost of a gaming PC ever 3-4 years, $700 that could last a douzen years is not as expensive as some people make it out to be. Stop getting wasted every week-end and you'll have your own kickass pc in months. So what if some have better hardware than we do? Kill them and laugh at them all the more.

Posted: Feb 19th 2010 10:24AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Lowering your field of view is the same as using a scope on a sniper rifle. If the FoV setting were to be unlocked, players could essentially zoom in with any weapon as if it had a scope, this is the unfair advantage that the GA staff refers to.

Back when I played the original UT, people used this in instagib games until Epic finally locked the command.

Posted: Feb 24th 2010 10:39AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
A very good read, and nice detective work :P

I only have a dual monitor and use the other one to watch movies/tv/web while I'm gaming or as a monitor for when I edit stuff on After Effects.
I acturally feel more comfortable with my single monitor gaming :) It's more cosy

Featured Stories

Betawatch: October 18 - 24, 2014

Posted on Oct 24th 2014 8:00PM

The Stream Team: Dungeoning in Swordsman

Posted on Oct 24th 2014 7:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW