PlugMonkey Comments

Page 1 of 89

  • His Story: How Sam Barlow rewrote the video game script

  • PlugMonkey 03/05/2016

    @davidtran

    I couldn't agree more. I loved Silent Hill for it not being all about combat, and lost interest in the series as it became increasingly like Resident Evil.
    Reply +2
  • YouTubers will soon receive money raised during Content ID disputes

  • PlugMonkey 28/04/2016

    @Jackie_Chiles

    One of the main groups raising content ID disputes is video game manufacturers against video game critics.

    This is a very big, influential information channel, and control of it has huge repercussions in how video games are made and marketed.
    Reply +7
  • The Gears of War 4 season pass costs £40

  • PlugMonkey 27/04/2016

    @FMV-GAMER

    OK. Some interesting stuff in here.

    Firstly, what if they donít sell 5 million copies? What if they only sell 2 million copies? Then what? Instead of enjoying a modest success and making a new game, they go bust? Good system.

    Secondly, what's the future for this system? I mean long term; logical conclusion. Inflation is still rumbling along inconveniently in the background. What you're ultimately suggesting is that developers either tap into an ever increasing market (a pyramid scheme), or pare their budget back by around 3% year on year until the day arrives when £40 is the price of a bag of crisps.

    Thirdly, be very, very careful when you start using me using a strawman argument as a strawman argument. Srsly dude, the resultant double bubble strawman paradox has the potential to destroy the entire galaxy. You said that if devs can't make a profit (at £40) they should cut their budget ("budget accordingly") rather than increase the price. That's not a strawman. That's what you said.

    Why should they do that if there is a market that isn't you that doesn't want games made on an ever decreasing budget being sold at £40 by the ever decreasing group of surviving developers?

    That is what you said they should do, isn't it? You didn't say they should be BANNED from doing it otherwise, but you did say you think they shouldn't. Didn't you? Well, own it! Don't come at me with your weaselly strawman accusations. I never said you 'had to be happy', I said you were WRONG. I said your idea of 'budgeting accordingly' instead of increasing the price was ILLOGICAL, NONSENSICAL and WRONG.

    I am allowed to give my subjective opinion am I not?
    Now who's being defensive? Yeah, you're allowed to give your subjective opinion, and if I think it's wrong, I'm allowed to give my subjective opinion that it's wrong. This is one of the inevitable side effects of sharing your subjective opinion on a public forum.

    Especialy if it's stupid. :P
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 27/04/2016

    @SonicUk

    I think a 50/60 pound price for the game and 20 for dlc would be much more in proportion for what I'm willing to pay.

    Interestingly, you would rather pay £60 for the game and £20 for the DLC than pay £40 for the game and £40 for the DLC, because that feels more Ďrightí, even though it can only ever cost you more money and never less. (Youíre paying £60 for the game or £80 for the game + DLC instead of £40 for the game and £80 for the game + DLC).

    This is an illogical but entirely common cognitive effect. There have been lots of studies of wage structures that have shown people generally will choose a structure they view as fair over a structure that pays them more. I'm inclined to agree, tbh. £60 removes that nagging doubt that you've only got half a game. This feeling is completely irrespective of how much content there is or isn't. Take that, Game Theory! :)

    I don't really mind this being how people feel, but the crazed OCD part of me DEMANDS that they at least acknowledge it's illogical. :P

    Also, what puzzles me is developers are saying games are more expensive to make this gen. Shouldn't they be cheaper?

    Most of the increased cost is in asset creation. Hereís a supercar from GTA 3:



    And hereís a supercar from GTA V



    That level of detail doesnít just take more computing power to shunt around, it also takes the artists waaaay longer to model and texture, which in turn costs more money.

    Then you have to apply that level of detail increase to everything, because anything in GTA V that looks like GTA 3 will stick out like a sore thumb. So, thatís the world, the character models, the character animations. And not just art: the audio, physics simulations, particle effects, incidental dialogue, lighting, shadows - everything has to take the step up in quality or ruin the whole effect.

    According to the credits, GTA 3 had two animators. GTA V had six facial animators. Three times as many, just on faces.

    The Division has that level of detail (if not more) on the cars you use as cover. You don't even drive them. It's just something to hide behind. And then the super detailed cars have snow on them. And you can make footprints in the snow. Perfectly realistic footprints in the snow on the car that's only there to stop a bullet. It's an insane level of detail, and it's very expensive. There's probably a team in Ubisoft somewhere who JUST do snow.

    Even optimisation isnít actually made any easier. It's harder. Youíve got more power, but youíve also got a vastly more complicated project taking advantage of all that power, so optimisation stops being like trying to sort out a garden shed and becomes like trying to sort out a warehouse.

    And thatís about all there is to it.

    Tl;dr: More detail = more content creators.
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 27/04/2016

    @FMV-GAMER

    Also if publishers feel that they cannot make a profit from games whose fault is that, they should budget appropriately.....
    So, if publishers can't make a profit at £40, they should slash their budgets.

    Even if there are people willing to pay £80, they aren't allowed to make big budget games for those people because you don't like it and you say so.

    LOL!
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 27/04/2016

    @ThePissartist

    Why can't I play a game play it a reasonable number of hours and complete it without having to grind or pay more?
    I give up. Why can't you?

    There are literally thousands of games released each year that are like that. Why can't you play one?
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 26/04/2016

    @super_monty

    Profit is higher, but investment (and therefore risk) is also higher.

    I think the inflation based price increases were absorbed for years by the rapidly expanding user base* through the PlayStation 1-3 era. This in turn lead to the £40=Game=Forever! mentality. Now that's levelled off and production costs have continued to spiral, we're seeing prices increase on marquee products to whatever the market will sustain.

    I don't think it's entirely coincidental that what the market will sustain for an expensive toy today turns out to be the same as it was 25 years ago.

    (Rick Dangerous 2 wasn't a AAA console game. It was an independently published game for home computers. You still get those today, and they're still cheaper than console games. If that's what you want, go get it!)

    *Edit: Oooh, and optical media. That was a £10-£15 saving that got passed straight on to you.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 26/04/2016

    @SonicUk

    Sega's handling of Sonic is a mystery to us all - especially with new 2D games selling plenty on all formats. I'm guessing the skills might just no longer exist within the organisation.

    Would you prefer the game to include all this DLC and be £80? Someone else said they would earlier and got negged even more than me. Which is always a pretty good effort.

    I don't think you can ditch it altogether and still have the base game at £40. Would you take a £60/£20 split for game and DLC? That's probably a truer value split, I think. The season pass buyers are kind of subsidising the entry level buyers. As an entry level buyer, on the rare occasions I do dip into the mainstream, I'm OK with that if the people paying more are - and it seems they are.

    especially if those maps and content do turn out to be on the disc itself.
    Is it better value for money if you have to wait for it to download and use up HD space on it? Actually, let's not fall out again. :)
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 26/04/2016

    @lukazor

    Thanks! I won't be getting it either. I haven't been a mainstream gamer since games went mainstream. I just don't resent games for it...
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 26/04/2016

    @SonicUk

    Because no matter how shit something is they'll always be some fools that buy it regardless, in this case making it bad for everyone.
    Tell that to Sega, Sonic! :P

    In a free and competitive market, you won't succeed selling a poor product for too much money. You'll go bust.

    There really, really won't be enough fools who buy it regardless. That's quite obviously completely untrue.

    I think the main problem stems from todays younger generation of gamers who've grown up knowing no different, literally, so they buy into this crap thinking its the way things are supposed to be - it isn't.
    Yes, they haven't developed the notion that a video game should be £40 all-in, on account that they were £40 25 years ago and so should be £40 forever.

    I'm not seeing how that makes them the irrational parties in this though.

    And, as I've already said, I'm not going to call them fools for spending the same as I used to spend for considerably less. I call young people fools for countless other things daily, but I can't get on board with this one.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 26/04/2016

    @SonicUk

    If shit like this represents bad value, how come people are buying it?

    How is the value of shit like this set, if not by the market and the consumer?

    I don't buy them, but I can't sit here and say that kids today are morons for spending the same on something as I spent when I was a kid. Especially when that something has far more features and content.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 26/04/2016

    @Supernaught

    Would everyone prefer they simply sold the game for $80-$90 instead? I would.
    It would appear from the votes on your post that everyone would very much NOT prefer them to simply sell the game for $80-$90 instead.

    What I'm going to infer from this is that what everyone would prefer is them to sell the whole thing for £40, even though £40 is how much a full game cost IN NINETEEN FUCKING NINETY!

    At £80, a full AAA console game has been restored to the same price as it was in the Good Old Days. No more. This has been in the post for a loooooong time. You can't just keep getting everything cheaper forever. Sorry.

    Neg me.

    You still can't.

    Sorry.

    Edit: Keep negging! Maybe it'll change things!

    Wait...

    Nope.

    You still can't. ;) :P
    Reply -9
  • Blizzard responds to WOW Nostalrius pirate/private server closure

  • PlugMonkey 26/04/2016

    @Frosty840

    Throw that out in front of the "real world" and I guarantee you that within hours the thing would've been hacked, hacked again, 'sploited, griefed and probably taken entirely offline by enterprising script kiddies before anyone scary had even bothered to look at it properly.
    Wow. It's pretty lucky the developers of the pirate server didn't expose it to the 'real world' then, but rather only released it in La-la Land where all the hackers adhere to strict honour codes. :P

    the only reason I can see that they wouldn't have done it already is that they can't.
    The only reason I can see that they wouldn't have done it already is that they don't want to. It would divide their community, draw focus away from their big expensive new releases, and set a precedent for future expectations of support for old content. "Will it make a lot of money?" the shareholders would ask. No, it won't. It would just...be nice. Yeah...

    They obviously could do it, because if it was that hard a bunch of hackers wouldn't have been able to get most of the way there in their spare time with zero resources or support.

    You think Blizzard would have a hard time finding this content? Try doing it when you're not Blizzard doing it illegally behind their backs. Nobody is going to convince me that's harder!

    The fact is that if Blizzard had a live game running right this second with a poxy 200k subscribers, they would shut it down. Not start it up. Shut it down. It's small scale, there isn't a billion dollars in it, so they don't care.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 26/04/2016

    "We explored options for developing classic servers and none could be executed without great difficulty,"
    Yes. The kind of difficulty that can only possibly be overcome by people working in their spare time for free.
    Reply -1
  • I don't accept the premise of the question

  • PlugMonkey 25/04/2016

    @popej

    Dude, you said "it's your experience." Then you proceed to explain why it shouldn't be.

    Mixed message!
    Not really. The point is that it's not the game designer's job to safeguard against you wilfully ruining a game for yourself. It's your experience. That means you are responsible for safeguarding it.

    If you really do want to break it you can, just don't then complain if you're having a crappy time. :P
    Reply +4
  • PlugMonkey 25/04/2016

    The problem here is that although a video game may challenge you, it isnít actually intended as a test. Itís there to entertain you.

    Itís your experience - you do what you want with it - but if you Ďreject the premiseí of the game and spend all your time trying to break it, donít come crying to the game designer if your experience is shallow and unsatisfying.

    Do you also Ďreject the premiseí of the films you watch? You could spend your time trying to spot whatís a model shot and whatís a matte painting, or you could let yourself go with it. Doing the former doesnít make you some kind of special alternative thinker, it just makes you miss out on the latter.

    99 times out of 100, I think youíll have more fun if you suspend your disbelief and work with the game instead of against it. It isnít working against you.

    Itís damn depressing to fire up Journey for someone and watch them immediately run off in the opposite direction. ďI want to know if I can break it.Ē Really? Why? Which answer to that question are you anticipating being more enjoyable than the crafted experience the game is offering in the other direction? Is it the empty triumph of Ďyesí or the dull reassurance of Ďnoí?
    Reply +16
  • How PlayStation Neo and the original PS4 will co-exist

  • PlugMonkey 22/04/2016

    @I_Am_CatButler


    The differences we're talking about are much closer to those between the XBone and PS4 than between console generations.
    Well said.

    This isn't a generational leap. That's what a new console usually means, but the whole entire point of difference here is that this isn't that, so comparisons of previous generational switches are completely irrelevant.
    Reply +2
  • PlugMonkey 22/04/2016

    @I_Am_CatButler

    Hardware progresses faster on PC no doubt, but software tends to make generational leaps in sync with consoles.
    To the casual observer, that would seem to suggest to me that rigid console generations are a drag on progress rather than the driving force behind it.

    I don't think newer technology being available to more people sooner will slow progress overall.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 21/04/2016

    @Gemini42_

    What I'd like to know from the naysayers is what their preferred course of action from Sony would be?

    VR is here. Sony are launching their own VR headset in a few months. The current PS4 won't get the best out of it.

    Should they:

    a) Postpone the release of PSVR for five years until the 'next gen' happens, to appease their loyal 'fans'?

    b) Release PSVR in October on a console that gives a heavily compromised experience with it and watch it sink without a trace.

    c) Launch the PS5 now to support PSVR, and let developers ditch PS4 support to start making exclusive games for PS5.

    It's all very well people throwing a tantrum, but if Sony can't do this, what are they supposed to do instead?
    Reply +2
  • PlugMonkey 21/04/2016

    @I_Am_CatButler

    Uptake of technology is incredibly slow, it has taken years for 64-bit and multi-core support to become mainstream on PCs.
    More than eight years?

    There are smaller steps on PC, but the overall progression of technology happens at the same rate. It is, after all, the same technology.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 21/04/2016

    @Gemini42_

    It's just my view that the PS4 will be phased out in favour of Neo before we reach the end of this generation and move onto the next, whenever that may be.
    Eventually, yes. Although I expect the Neo's successor will be here before that happens. There will be no 'next generation'.

    Hopefully what we're seeing here is rolling technology updates replacing discreet generations. It's how every technology sector apart from games consoles already works.

    Frankly, console generations are a massive pain the balls. Forwards compatibility forever? Hurray! About bloody time!

    Sony will continue to support the original PS4 for precisely as long as there is demand for it.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 21/04/2016

    @the_rydster

    Exactly. Sega tried this crap with 32X and Mega CD. It was a debacle.
    Except Sega very much didn't try this crap with 32X and Mega CD because they were both entirely separate systems whose games were incompatible with each other, and with the base Mega Drive.

    This situation is completely incomparable.
    Reply +6
  • Revealed: Sony's plan for PlayStation 4K - codename Neo

  • PlugMonkey 21/04/2016

    @higganos

    Are you using wired or wireless? I don't know about PS4, but on PS3 the wifi was crap. You could get a much higher bandwidth through a cable (if you could get one to reach).

    I wouldn't be at all surprised if PS4 was the same.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 21/04/2016

    @grassyknoll

    As this has never worked in the history of gaming
    Nor has it been tried in the history of gaming. Well, not by a console manufacturer anyway. It's how PC gaming has always worked. Upgrade options come along all the time. You don't buy them all, you choose when to upgrade.

    Having more options is not the end of days.
    Reply +5
  • PlugMonkey 20/04/2016

    @MDL199

    As I said in an earlier post I reckon this move is about extending the life of PS4 and guarding against an early release of a console/PC hybrid by MS before the PS5 is ready to go.
    I think it's just about VR, pure and simple. VR has rapidly broken through just after the long awaited new console gen was all locked down. And they don't have quite enough. Awkward.

    You need a meaty old PC for Oculus and Vive and I just can't see the current PS4 providing a very good experience. It might work, but it won't fly.

    Not much point courting high end gadget freaks with your own VR platform if you don't have a machine with enough grunt to power it properly. The whole thing would be completely hamstrung.

    Their VR headset launches in October, and the first Neo titles launch in...October. I expect a simultaneous release.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 20/04/2016

    @justerthought

    Rather than upgrade, the average PC gamer will just buy a PS4 Neo.
    Hello. I'm the average PC gamer.

    No I won't.
    Reply +4
  • PlugMonkey 19/04/2016

    I see certain quarters of the EG community are reacting to this news in their usual balanced and even tempered way...

    Reply +16
  • PlugMonkey 19/04/2016

    @Apostate

    At a guess it will be like 'minimum' specs and 'recommended' specs on PC.

    But as with PC, that will mean some games performing pretty shockingly on the 'minimum' specs.
    Reply +23
  • Dark Souls 3's multiplayer is a very different, absolutely brilliant take on online

  • PlugMonkey 19/04/2016

    @mingster

    The legendary hiding in plain sight. Always worth a re-post.
    Reply +6
  • PlugMonkey 19/04/2016

    @Arsecake_Baker

    Eight times out of ten you'll be the victim of lag or bad hit detection and those who ruthlessly exploit the games invincibilty frames!
    Hard not to agree.

    I love the idea of the Dark Souls PvP, and I gamely play along whenever an invader shows up, but the reality is that most fights will come down to some wiki savvy min/maxer exploiting glitches I'm not even aware of.
    Reply +4
  • There's a way to play Oculus Rift exclusives on HTC Vive

  • PlugMonkey 15/04/2016

    @Bander

    Thanks! I do have some muscle problems, so that could be a consideration...
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 15/04/2016

    @CaptainKid

    That's possibly even dumber. Facebook have invested money in Oculus, and so their mission statement (which is somehow also pushed out to all the 3rd party developers) has obviously spun round to 'VR candy crush'?

    Which isn't even made by Facebook.

    I imagine that has probably been dictated by Zuckerberg himself.

    Facebook aren't Evil. Valve aren't Good. All the snooty, judgemental tribalism is incomprehensibly stupid. I just want to know which hardware is best.

    Off the back of some far more sensible discussions elsewhere, I'm leaning towards Vive for the front facing camera. That has some interesting potential applications.

    Thank you sensible, non-EG people!
    Reply +4
  • PlugMonkey 15/04/2016

    @StooMonster

    Steam was constantly updating, often failed to connect to update, and when it did that you were screwed. I can't count the number of times I had to play a non-Valve game just because Steam was acting up. If that wasn't your personal experience, then all I can say is that you were VERY lucky.

    It was a piece of shit for many years after it was first released (and, crucially, undeniably, and undebateably, was forced upon anyone who wanted to play Half-Life 2).

    The HL2 problem was that they didn't have network capacity to authenticate the peak volume of users.
    Oh, well that's OK then! Because nobody cares these days when your online authentication for an offline game doesn't have the network capacity to authenticate the peak volume of users!

    How about everyone just stops pretending that Valve are some kind of special exception? They do, and have always done, all the same stuff as the companies it is fashionable to hate.

    And people accuse me of "drinking the kool aid"...
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 15/04/2016

    @Pasco_

    Any attempts at lock in, be they stores, or peripherals, or display devices, or whatever, will fail in the long run.

    Valve understand this implicitly, which is why Steam has been such a huge success when compared to GFWL, Windows Store, Origin, Uplay, etc.
    Yes, absolutely.

    Well, that and the fact you couldn't play Half-Life 2 without installing it, despite it being a barely functional, broken piece of shit at the time.

    Amazing what a good exclusive will do for your platform though.

    Edit: Haha. The mute historical revisionists are out again.
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 15/04/2016

    @smelly

    That seems to be the best advice available, but I'd love to know how the hardware really stacks up, head to head.

    (Why you and SuperShinobi are getting polar opposite voting reactions to saying the exact same damn thing, I have no idea...)
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 15/04/2016

    @CaptainKid

    I should get the one from the billion dollar company I use daily even though they track my activity to try and sell me things, and avoid the one from the billion dollar company I use daily even though they track my activity to try and sell me things?

    Check.

    (This may be my cynical nature, but Valve are not your friends, people. Just buy the better hardware.)
    Reply +4
  • PlugMonkey 14/04/2016

    Oy! Eurogamer! Should I get a Vive or a Rift?

    You've reviewed them both, so I know they're both pretty good, but which one should I buy? Inform me already!
    Reply -4
  • Total War: Warhammer future DLC plans include free new race

  • PlugMonkey 12/04/2016

    @cen4pgb

    No, it would not be fraud. They could start giving the entire game away for free, and it still wouldn't be fraud.
    Reply +5
  • Rust now assigns gender permanently based on SteamID

  • PlugMonkey 11/04/2016

    @dogmanstaruk

    ...one which would even better if players were allowed to independently express themselves...
    It's not all about you.

    The game creator also wants to express himself by creating a game where the population is balanced, and everyone's physical appearance is determined by a random seed, like in real life.

    *shrugs*

    It's their game.

    I kind of like it. It's a different, novel solution. I'm far more intrigued to play Rust now to find out who I am than I ever would have been to see what sort of mutated troll I can squeeze out of a half baked character creator.

    I'm always slightly bemused when the audience turns to the game creator and says "No, spend hundreds of man hours implementing a feature you have zero interest in!" Why would he want to do that? Why would we want him to? It's his game. Let him focus on the bits he's interested in, and find novel solutions for the bits he isn't.

    Isn't that better than just following the crowd? Implementing a feature as a consumer box ticking exercise? If you'll excuse me, I've just been slightly sick up in the back of my mouth.
    Reply -2
  • Hardcore Henry review

  • PlugMonkey 08/04/2016

    @Sousuke_Sagara

    You donít really come across as a snob in the main, tbh. You come across as someone with a very broad interest in cinema, but with a weird need to qualify some of the things you like and disqualify some things other people like. I donít get this need, and thatís where I think our opinions differ.

    Seriously? A man is a snob, if he dislikes a cheap and cheezy movie?
    No, but a man is being a snob if he dismisses a movie out of hand just because itís cheap and cheezy.

    Itís not the disliking of something, itís the why of it. Saying something canít be good because itís cheap is snobbery. Saying something canít be good because itís silly is intellectual snobbery.

    A man is also being a snob if he positions himself above people who like such movies by suggesting it demonstrates they are intellectually and emotionally inferior.

    Am I allowed to express such opinion? I mean without being called names and such?
    Btw, "awesome f*cking movie"? Come on. If you're twelve maybe.
    UmÖ
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 07/04/2016

    @Sousuke_Sagara

    Not liking bad movies doesn't make anyone a snob,
    You don't know this is a bad movie. You only know it's a movie with a gimmick.

    These things aren't the same! It could be a well paced, slickly edited, imaginatively staged movie with a gimmick.

    If you dismiss something just because it has a gimmick, you are being a pretentious snob.

    My tastes have developed in that they have broadened, but there isn't a single movie that I liked when I was 14 that I don't like now, or do like and am embarrassed about. The whole point myself and Paul_Denton have been trying to make is that there is no such thing as guilty pleasures. Why feel guilty? Why affect airs?

    If you like something, you like it! And you know what? 999 times out of 1000, you'll like it because it's good. When people say they like 'bad movies', what they almost invariably really mean is that they like cheezy movies, or campy movies, or weird movies, or cheap movies.

    If you dislike a movie purely because it is cheezy or campy or weird or cheap (or gimmicky) you are being a pretentious snob.

    Sorry, but you are. I'm not making this something it's not. I don't want to be rude. I just think you're really wrong, and not getting any less wrong the better you explain it.
    Reply +3
  • PlugMonkey 07/04/2016

    @Sousuke_Sagara

    but as we are (or at least should be) a bit more experienced and demanding now,
    Why should I be? The whole 'teenage self' thing is what's wrong. To feel that way you've either got to have turned into a snob, or been a teenager with really terrible taste. :P

    Edit: neglol. Sorry, but if you think you can't like action movies because you're a grown up, you're not worldly and wise. You're pretentious.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 07/04/2016

    @Paul_Denton

    I think it sounds like this year's Crank.

    Someone who dismisses Crank isn't an intellectual, they're a snob.
    Reply +4
  • PlugMonkey 07/04/2016

    @Paul_Denton

    Quite. It has a gimmick and a deliberately silly set-up and a boat load of violence, but that doesn't mean it can't also be intelligently put together and choreographed with wit and style.

    Thousands of bad, violent, gimmicky low budget movies are made every year that aren't plucked for nationwide cinema releases. I'll be very surprised if it doesn't have a bit more going for it than that.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 07/04/2016

    to me he's clearly the new Robert Rodriguez, favouring cool shots over worrying about performances or narrative cohesion.
    That's fine. That's fine. I mean, you obviously don't understand Rodriguez's movies at all, which is fine, and I'm fine with that.

    But say that again and I'll kill you. :cool:
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 07/04/2016

    @Agarwel_Idiriz

    Victoria - one 135 min long shot.
    Not literally one shot (you couldn't get film reels that long) but Hitchcock did that trick with Rope in 1948.

    B movie legend Bruce Campbell was in one called Running Time in the 90s too.
    Reply +3
  • Quantum Break makes pirates wear an eye-patch

  • PlugMonkey 06/04/2016

    @IronSoldier

    I'm not suggesting those things you've imagined at all.
    Not directly, no. You're suggesting things that are impossible, based on naively observed relationships that don't exist.

    The only way to create the illusion of the impossible things you are suggesting would be doing the things I've imagined. That was the point.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 06/04/2016

    @IronSoldier

    Interesting that Remedy spent time on this gimmick rather than ensuring the PC version runs well and includes basic features such as being able to exit the game normally,
    You are conflating two completely unrelated things there. You can't hold off features implemented at one stage of the project until you see how optimisation and bug fixing goes at a completely different stage of the project.

    What you're actually suggesting is that you think Remedy should have risked adding new bugs by having someone go in and remove a feature because some entirely different people had failed to find and fix a completely unrelated bug.

    And then you're wondering why you're getting negative votes?
    Reply 0
  • Pro-vaping congressman takes heat after spending $1300 of campaign funds on Steam

  • PlugMonkey 06/04/2016

    I can't help feeling the fact that the charges were listed as "personal expense - to be paid back" seriously deflates the level of scandal here.

    He's late paying back the thing he didn't try to get away with? That's it? Lord Hogg spent twice that much having his moat cleaned!
    Reply +29
  • Coleco Chameleon boss: "I am officially tabling the console venture for good"

  • PlugMonkey 05/04/2016

    "What? Meet my girlfriend? Uh, no, she's from Canada..." Reply +23