ShiftyGeezer Comments

Page 1 of 24

  • Gaming on the Big Screen: Optoma GT1080 projector review

  • ShiftyGeezer 21/09/2014

    @richbambam : Nope. You don't get the same crystal sharpness as a smaller screen, but you get huge FOV, and this is what is what makes the big screen worth it. So we played with a wall sized (about 150" diagonal) 720p projection from about 6 feet away, and it was still fabulous. Obviously higher resolutions are better, but FOV counts for a lot for the big-screen experience. You get the same in VR headsets. These run typically 30 degree FOV screen resolutions (1080p) stretched to a 90 degree FOV. The image quality isn't as high (not 'retina') but it's still worth the drop in quality to gain the FOV immersion.

    On a 50" TV, you'd have to sit really close to get the same experience (wide FOV) and you'd have the same reduced image quality but with an uncomfortable closeness in the screen, plus an inability to gather several folk around it.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 21/09/2014

    I bought a short throw BenQ 720p projector a while back for a project. Used it in a living room to play various games, and it made them way better! Things like beat-'em-ups (Sacred Citadel) and FIFA were made easier to follow as everyone was playing on their own footage of screen, while first-person (GT) was more involving. I've been an advocate of projectors for gaming since then, although with the progress towards VR, projectors may never really break out of being a niche. The minimum price is just way too high. Reply +8
  • Elite: Dangerous beta 2 launches this month

  • ShiftyGeezer 19/09/2014

    In addition to this second beta, Frontier commemorating the 30th anniversary of the original BBC Micro Elite by offering free copies of the 1984 game.
    Kinda shot themselves in the foot with that one. If they're going to give the game away for free eventually, why buy it now? I'll just wait 30 years and get Elite: Dangerous as a freebie...
    Reply +5
  • Ridiculous AirVR headset straps a mobile device to your face

  • ShiftyGeezer 18/09/2014

    "AirVR is the most affordable way to experience the world of Virtual Reality for yourself," the developer stated on its Kickstarter page.
    So it comes complete with the iPad Mini or iPhone 6 for that $49 CAD?...
    Reply +1
  • Sony quadruples forecast loss for financial year

  • ShiftyGeezer 17/09/2014

    @ipar : Grassyknoll covered that, but are you going to pretend Japan doesn't exist as well?

    Yes it really looks like 5:1 sales gap.lol
    You have reading comprehension issues. I said 5:1 in some places. In MS's best markets, it's being outsold something like 1.5:1. In other markets its more like 3:1. Japan, it's 10:1 at launch.

    So how is MS's bottomless chest of cash making them unbeatable in the console space exactly? It's not. Never has done. You can't just buy success in any business. You have to invest, build up a brand, turn people around, and everything else. Having limitless cash does not mean an instant win for any company.
    Reply +3
  • ShiftyGeezer 17/09/2014

    @ipar : PS3 wasn't better than XB360 as evidenced by the games. They were mostly comparable, often with 360 having a little edge over PS3 in multiplats.

    Also, I never said hardware wins over great software, but the software of the two machines is pretty much the same. MS's money isn't helping there, unless they buy a massive studio and own all the software.

    Hence your original remark is patently false. MS's money does not mean they win the console war. It didn't work for PS2 (MS lost 5 billion getting XBox to have a small presence), it didn't really demolish Sony with PS3 because they were equals, despite MS making loads of cash and Sony constantly losing money year on year, and it isn't helping them now with PS4 outselling XB1 by a huge ratio worldwide (up to 5:1 in some places).
    Reply -2
  • ShiftyGeezer 17/09/2014

    @ipar :The console war is an independent battle, like the Eastern Front as opposed to the Western and Southern Fronts. Sony can win the console battle, but lose the corporate war. MS have little to compete with in the console space at the moment, and unless they buy...EA, all that money isn't really going to help them. Whatever quality exclusives MS can get, Sony can match, and exclusives only represent about 10% of games sold to consoles. MS really should have spent their money on awesome hardware if they wanted to win the console gamers over, but it's too late now. Reply +2
  • ShiftyGeezer 17/09/2014

    @cashsun : although it seems to have done quite well this time with what little I've seen of reviews. Xperia Z3 is well received, while iPhone 6 is disappointing where reviewers have compared it to the Z3, such as being waterproof. So in this case, iPhone 6 comes off less shiny, and some people waiting on the the 6 may think, "maybe that Z3 is worth a look?"

    The carrier issue must be bad for Sony in the US. Seems like a really stupid, uncompetitive market over there for mobile. But for the rest of the world, Sony should get back to innovating. They used to be good at that, introducing new tech no-one else had. For me, I bought a Samsung S3 Mini as a phone because it was cheap (on special on Amazon, original launch price was stupid) and good quality I trusted, + OLED screen, and a Galaxy Note 10.1 tablet for the stylus. So Samsung was offering me the right products and value. Sony's offering neither. Maybe they should focus on photography in a big way in their cameras? Their optical division is pretty cutting edge. Sony's FW is always a bit crazy and broke though!
    Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 17/09/2014

    @UncleLou : Different companies get different results. Samsung is in part as big as it is in the mobile space because it offers an insane range of devices, from cheap as chips to premium. Apple has stuck with one or two models, in contrast. If there's no profits to be had on low end hardware because competition has squeezed margins, there's some sense to targeting just the high end. The S4 sold something like 40 million. However, I do worry that the high end is pretty saturated. AFAIK everyone's seeing decreasing sales of their expensive handsets, because the annual updates don't justify the crazy prices and people are now content with their 1 or 2 year old, still awesome phone.

    Overall I'd say the mobile space is a difficult one for Sony to navigate. Sony quality at a midrange price could be good, but I don't think Sony are that great at competing on price. They got to be as big as they are now by being more expensive and higher quality than the competition, but that's not so readily done these days.
    Reply +1
  • The Xbook One is a $1500 Xbox One laptop

  • ShiftyGeezer 15/09/2014

    @laserpanda : These happen every gen though.

    Images of PS3 laptop:
    https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=playstation+laptop&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=ErwWVMGOKcftaKeogNgI&ved=0CEEQsAQ&biw=1188&bih=723

    Website for console modding:
    http://kyorune.com/modding/
    Reply +1
  • Fancy-pants FIFA 15 TV ad is virtual reality football

  • ShiftyGeezer 12/09/2014

    A girl? Playing FIFA? Strange times indeed. :p Reply 0
  • Pokémon fan arrested after storming White House garden

  • ShiftyGeezer 12/09/2014

    @Kanjin I doesn't have to be spikes and bars. Just needs to be 8 feet high with some ornamentation on the top that stops a simple climb. You then force anyone trying to get in to need steps or some other apparatus, which makes it easier to limit encroachment. If they had a decent fence, they wouldn't be in lock-down now.

    lone_wolf_uk is right about the psychology though. The White House itself is going to be pretty secure regardless the height of the fence, excepting alien attacks and teleporting mutants.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 12/09/2014

    The Whitehouse fence can be jumped by a guy? Great security. ;) Reply +22
  • Fire the US Army's next-gen laser cannon with an Xbox controller

  • ShiftyGeezer 08/09/2014

    Asian lasers will use keyboard + mouse control instead and completely whip the US army. Countermeasures will include a 'jump mode' in missles and rockets so they keep hopping up and down and can't be targeted by the controller. ;) Reply +65
  • Where did all the strategy go?

  • ShiftyGeezer 07/09/2014

    Time. I used to play lengthy JRPGs and turn-based strategy games. Now I can't deal with protracted levels. Sniper Elite would be awesome, but I can't commit two hours at a time to play a level. Those of us who grew up with old tactical and strategy games (including hex-based true RTSes as the title suggested this was about) likely don't have the evenings and weekends to waste so self-indulgently, while kids growing up have had such a rush of high energy, high impact, short lived games, culminating in the throw-away experiences of mobile, that I doubt they could adapt to slower paced games without considerable effort (which they have no incentive to expend have plenty enough entertainment pitched exactly at their attention span). Heck, these days you pay a microtransaction to speed things up, eliminating both need to wait and bank balance.

    RTS (true and RTS FPSes) will remain a niche, but one probably still worth serving.
    Reply +2
  • Nintendo's Amiibo figurines cost £10.99 each in the UK

  • ShiftyGeezer 04/09/2014

    @Mr.Spo : Thanks for the YT link. That explains it better as different from the similar NFC ideas. Reply +2
  • ShiftyGeezer 04/09/2014

    @Mr.Spo : Okay, I could be wrong about the unlocks and making unfair parallels with Disney and Skylanders. That said, what little I've seen did suggest you unlock access to characters. To example video showed Mario appearing by using the figurine. If there's a better explanation of what Amiibo does than Nintendo's rather sparse product page, I'd like to see it so I can be properly educated and make a more informed opinion. Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 04/09/2014

    @Maneauleau : That's a PR vision but doesn't really describe what the functionality is. As I understand it, you have a tiny bit of memory and a wireless connection that can transfer a few kilobytes a second. That means you just have a set of parameters localised to your figure that games can read/write and use. Any extra functionality is going to come from the software.

    Or basically, they could sell a £10 'memory card' that does the same thing with dozens of different saveable, transferable characters.
    Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 04/09/2014

    @Maneauleau :http://www.nintendo.com/amiibo

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_CYWxyeOHk

    Okay, so I missed it stores a local save file for transfer of data. That's a nice feature for swapping data between devices and players, but it's still principally a dongle to unlock in game content, no?

    If using Mario Amiibo on SSB Wii U unlocks the Mario character (and maybe Mario level to play in game), you're just using a piece of hardware to unlock in-game content.
    Reply -5
  • ShiftyGeezer 04/09/2014

    These figurine things bring a new level to the concept of Day 1 DLC. The content is in the game, but you are locked out of access to it unless you buy a dongle.

    Modern software is turning really weird. You buy a full priced game but can't use all of it until you buy some very expensive (relative to the game) unlocks.
    Reply -16
  • Is Ouya looking for a buyer?

  • ShiftyGeezer 03/09/2014

    Towerfall was Ouya's top selling game, but only shifted 7000 copies
    I don't think anything else spells 'dead platform' as clearly as that.
    Reply +64
  • Editor's blog: A brief note about "GamerGate"

  • ShiftyGeezer 02/09/2014

    Reply +14
  • ShiftyGeezer 02/09/2014

    Um, why only for games? Why not...

    "If you see threats of violence or harm in comments on Steam, YouTube, Twitch, Twitter, Facebook or reddit, please take a minute to report them on the respective sites.

    "If you see hateful, harassing speech, take a public stand against it...
    ...for the internet in general?

    Edit: Also, what about voice chat and the general abuse thrown around in online gaming? How's about people should have a right to enjoy playing a game without being victim of abuse because they may not be particularly great at it? Which also extends to every aspect of life. How's about people just stop being shitty to each other generally, and everyone be nice?

    Maybe I should release an open letter?
    Reply +125
  • Face-Off: Plants vs Zombies: Garden Warfare on PS4

  • ShiftyGeezer 30/08/2014

    @Suarez07 : Good link. DF's results do seem well out of whack, unless the game is just running really badly on the i5. Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 30/08/2014

    Am I reading the PC conclusion right? An i5 and £200 GTX680 runs the game with more severe framerate drops than XB1 at chosen settings? Drop the quality level and the framerate will rise, but a £200 performance GPU + i5 is only really matching PS4 and not burying it?

    Edit - why would anyone vote this comment up or down? It's a question! Am I right or wrong?
    Reply +30
  • Valve is being sued by Australia's consumer rights commission over Steam's refund policy

  • ShiftyGeezer 29/08/2014

    @Mar27w : There, the place, like Where. Their, belongs to them. They're, contraction of 'they are'. It's easy to type the wrong one, but when one reads context you can pretty easily work out the right one. ;) Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 29/08/2014

    @darth_paul : Actually, the courts only apply the law. Designing them is the responsibility of Parliament etc. ;) Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 29/08/2014

    @Bruh : That's certainly possible, but legal covering for that doesn't yet exist, so the legal standing would remain as is. The companies could of course operate a decent refund policy as good consumer relations though. Quite often the T&C's say 'we won't ever give money back' but they do anyway. I guess such T&C's mean they won't give up anything without a fight, which in turn means they will only handle legitimate issues because no-one's going to go to considerable faff to get a refund when it's not deserved. That is, someone buying a game and completing it in 5 hours and wanting a refund isn't likely to kick up a real stink, whereas someone buying a game that keeps wiping the save game and they can't progress would argue their case until they were fairly treated.

    That's the real problem here - how do you determine if a refund is justified or if the consumers are cheating having enjoyed the game and wanting their money back?
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 29/08/2014

    @LargeStyle : From the consumer's POV, the producer doesn't enter into the equation. It's down to Valve or whatever retailer to deal with their suppliers and refunds/returns. Therefore your idea:

    I'd demand each game publisher to independently declare and operate their own refund policy and have Valve only (inderectly) involved as a communication system between the seller and consumer.
    ...is illegal. The producers don't set and operate the refund policy - the retailer has to.

    Valve could possibly change business type to something more like eBay or Amazon Sellers where they're just a store-front for individual sellers, but that'd be quite a change.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 29/08/2014

    @Bruh : You were actually wrong in that case. I know having sold software online that the Distance Selling Regulations don't cover digital goods (I had 'no refunds' on my T&C because everyone was told to try the trial first, although always gave refunds for idiots who'd buy clearly labelled PC software for Mac...). You don't get the same right to return/refund, no questions asked, as physical goods. This is basically because there's no way to ensure that you have removed the content. In the case of Steam, they can check that, but the law was written with a view to copyable content and so they are excepted.

    Independent proof...
    http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/problem/can-i-get-a-refund-on-a-digital-download
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 29/08/2014

    @LargeStyle : That's not legal; not in the UK (and EU AFAIK). In UK consumer law, your contract is with the seller, not the producer. Whatever Valve sells, they have to handle returns and refunds. Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 29/08/2014

    Where do refunds come in with Early Access? If a game is broken but is also unfinished, are buyers entitled to a refund? The warning "this is an unfinished game and may not work properly," cannot legally, in Australia, be accompanied with, "As such, no refunds are available," as that violates statutory rights. Reply 0
  • Hoax call sees YouTuber arrested by SWAT while live streaming

  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @George-Roper :
    Not one of those officers apologised to the guy. In the final minute, you could see them as it dawned on them nothing was going on.
    Yeah, that makes the SWAT team come across as pretty unpleasant. Obviously they have to present the hard-man image, but they should also be human beings. That said, they may have been far more apologetic once they got the all clear. There's going to be a chain of command and they shouldn't be relaxing until told to do so, as it were. But of course, that order should have come long before they breached the room. So I wouldn't be too hard on them for not going from ready-for-action to relaxed-and-apologetic in only 6 minutes.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @penhalion : AFAIK they don't know the call is from an IP phone. There's an example of a spoof call seemingly coming from the address the hoax caller claimed to be at, and that address was raided. eg. Imagine they get a phone call from someone saying they've been kidnapped. It would need investigating (although opening investigations with SWAT bursting through windows and waving guns around wouldn't be the obvious first choice for action).

    It's also certainly possible for a crim to call the police, for the numerous psychological factors involved that lead to such behaviour in the first place. There's nothing particularly untoward with the possibility of a man losing it, shooting a couple of co-workers, holding more hostage and then calling the police. The situation is definitely plausible and would need an immediate response. If it were me making the decisions, I'd definitely have SWAT suited up and ready in case they were needed. However, I wouldn't then send them in when the scenario clearly wasn't true. If the criminal has contacted the police, and is legitimate, there'd be a reason why. Either they want to open up a dialogue, or were baiting the police for a Suicide by Police Officer, or worse. That's where intelligence comes in. You don't act unless you are confident your actions are the right ones. It's just as dangerous in some situations to rush in threateningly as it is to delay action too long in other situations.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @penhalion : Is that the case regards the phone tracking? SWATTERS are using internet calls and spoofing locations by and large, from what I read. Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @Der_tolle_Eil :
    Should the dispatcher just completely ignore all the calls he got
    Call. One. From an office incident which nobody else reported.

    Furthermore, where did I say don't call SWAT? You call the police, you prep the SWAT team, the SWAT arrives and evaluates the situation and gets the intelligence needed to make decisive, successful action. And before you claim that's a two hour surveillance in which people could die, it needs as much or as little effort as the situation demands. There's no one-strategy-for-all-occasions solution. In this particular case, in getting the intelligence it was obviously a hoax, because it was business as usual in the office building where a guy had reportedly shot two co-workers and was holding more hostage.

    There is a real risk of innocent people getting hurt. Stopping the prank calls is necessary, but also having the brains to tell a situation isn't legitimate is also part of it. And that's actually really, really important. Any combat personnel going into a situation with civilians needs a lot of awareness and sense to not make ghastly mistakes. That awareness and sense should have made it obvious to the law-enforcement personnel that this was a prank.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @Pandy : Ridiculous exaggerated counter-argument. I didn't say do nothing. Responding doesn't mean bursting in (although that's possible difficult for gamers to grasp ;)). The police received a forwarded 911 call...

    http://kdvr.com/2014/08/27/watch-littleton-gamer-held-at-gunpoint-in-apparent-swatting-hoax/

    '“The caller stated that he had just shot multiple people, multiple co-workers, at his office building over here,” said Littleton police chief Doug Stephens.​'

    So the police were informed, as they understood it by the perp which means he knew the police knew and they couldn't surprise him, that he had shot colleagues, at work, during office hours. They went to the business park...

    'The SWAT response also led to several security precautions at area schools. Other businesses in the office park were also impacted.'

    Now how could there be a gunman in the business in the business park having shot two people and be holding others, and yet there be absolutely no outside evidence of this? No-one running from the building, nor multiple phone calls from other office workers?

    There's no way the story could have been true. And if it had, the fact that as the SWAT team approached the alleged perp was completely aware of them, had he actually had hostages in the room he could have started shooting. This shows the tactics as applied were completely misplaced in this instance.

    They should have known before hand where the perp was and where the hostages were to proceed with an effective action and avoid casualties. And in getting that info, they should have learnt there weren't any and it was a hoax.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @Der_tolle_Emil :
    Yup, I can clearly see you are in a position to make informed decisions.
    Sorry, should I just completely ignore all the media reporting on the incident as just being made up? What really happened is that several people called the police independently, a SWAT team was dispatched, there were obvious signs of conflict and, having used surveillance equipment to identify the perpetrator and that he wasn't in a position to respond to a rush attack, they crashed into the room to save lives, but the reporting of the police spokesperson was fabricated.

    Sending in SWAT != saving lives. It only saves lives if it's the right cause of action. It can also cause more deaths. eg. What if the place had been wired with explosives? You don't enter a building with an armed gunman and who knows what else without being informed. And if they were informed, they wouldn't have acted as they did because there was no threat.

    I mean, really, what exactly were the dire consequences of this call?
    These calls, plural. It's an ongoing problem. As well as the financial waste, it also generates completely unnecessary stress for those involved, not to mention the potential for a tragic accident. What if a mum hears men breaking into her house and her children screaming and grabs the gun from the drawer to defend them? Or should we wait until a tragic accident occurs before trying to fix an obviously flawed system?
    Reply +2
  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @Der_tolle_Emil :
    However, don't you think that the team didn't consider both approaches?
    No. Because the logic doesn't support the wait-and-see approach. We know some of the details as per the news article, unless that is incorrect reporting. So it was at a place of work. There should have been obvious signs of a shooting in a work-place. More confusingly for me, it looks like a home address and apartment block.

    It is just preposterous to think that a 6 minute clip is enough for people like us to judge the team's behavior.
    It's not the 6 minute response that's being criticised. It's the half hour or whatever that lead up to that six minutes. From the time the call came in without any corroboration to the time the guy's door was smashed in, even if the SWAT team was already suited up and driving down the street five minutes away when the call went in, there was plenty of opportunity to evaluate the situation and see it actually warranted SWAT.

    There is a reason for the way these situations are handled and no, it's not because someone said how it should be done 50 years ago without anyone ever asking any questions.
    That's naive. People get things wrong all the time. Whatever the thinking behind this, it's clearly not sensible. And remember we're not just talking about one event, but a wide problem with SWAT responding to hoax calls. It's not a once off, but a clear failure of process to legitimately determine the need to use SWAT. It's different to the police, fire, or ambulance services being called because they *are* supposed to be the first response. SWAT should only ever appear at a scene when called in by the police or similar.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @Der_tolle_Emil : That's an attitude that basically says human beings don't have intelligence to evaluate things independently, and that's a view history has proven wrong time and again in every field. Plenty of times, the trained experts have proceeded according to the status quo, and sometimes done more harm than good. And it's been shown that anyone, irrespective of background or training, can have intelligent insights and find better ways to do things.

    Instead of underestimating yourself, actually imagine yourself in the different situations. Human beings possess imagination not just for entertainment but also to be able to evaluate situations without having to actually experience them. If you're in a hostage situation (or indeed any situation where you need the actions of someone else and where those actions can make things better or worse), would you rather SWAT turn up with no idea what the details of the situation are, where the hostages and the threats are, and act with blind disregard for those details, or would you rather people ascertain the realities of the situation before acting? Some other examples - a routine scan finds a lump on an internal organ. Should they remove it immediately or spend time taking a biopsy and blood tests to ascertain if it's a threat or not? Your child says they're being bullied at school. Do you go to the alleged bully's parents and have a go at them, or do you raise it with the school and determine the validity of the claims? A country is said to have weapons of mass destruction. Do you launch a pre-emptive offensive just in case, or do you send in your covert ops to determine the validity of the claims?

    There's a reason why the military and special forces invest so much in intelligence gathering, and that's because it's essential for effective action. Action without intelligence is stupid and reckless. You don't need to be a trained special operative as it's true in many areas of life.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @jonc24 : You look through windows for starters. Listen in with devices. Then there's the situation. How did the guy shoot two people and keep others hostages without anyone else in the building being aware?

    Furthermore, the 'people inside' were already aware of the police because, supposedly, they called them! It's not like the police were alerted by a concerned civilian who heard gunshots and wanted to surprise the hostage takers before they knew the police were even alerted. Or was the hostage taker, who said 'don't send the police,' not looking for the police to arrive out the windows and wasn't listening for them at the door?

    If this was a real event, and the kid was a gunman, he'd have heard the police outside. He knew he was being SWATTED long before they busted down the door. At that point he could have started shooting hostages or anything. How on earth is this a showcase of an effective, competent, useful SWAT response? Turning up alerting the alleged purps to your presence and without knowing what was actually going on?
    Reply +3
  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @Der_tolle_Emil : So you'd rather in a hostage situation that the police just turn up shouting with no idea how many hostages are there, where they are, the risks involved, etc.?

    This isn't complicated. In a hostage situation, you ascertain first and foremost, if you can, where the hostages are and how to get them out safely. Or do you dispute that? For that, you need tactical information, so you use surveillance etc. The only reason not to is the element of surprise, which clearly isn't going to work when the alert about the hostages comes from the hostage taker themself.

    Seriously, read the above report. The phone call claimed the guy had killed two coworkers and had more as hostage. They, in turn, enter the building where this happens, and there's NO EVIDENCE that it's happened - no panicked people or crowds outside saying there's a gunman inside - and decide the best course of action is to break into the room.

    It's a bit like calling the fire brigade to a fire at a shop, the fire brigade arriving and seeing there's no fire, but they proceed to spray the place with water anyway.

    the fact you and others can complacent with the heavy handed approach suggests to me that it's you guys who have been adversely influenced by Hollywood and are all in favour of the unrealistic hard-core response. Me personally, I'd like the police to take their time and do a good job, which would mean not responding with a SWAT team to a situation that clearly didn't need one.

    Realistically, the SWAT team should never be where they're not needed, because the response should be police first, full evaluation, then SWAT if they are found to be necessary.
    Reply +4
  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @jabberwocky :
    SWAT will clear the room and hold it until told otherwise. They follow their orders.
    The question is why were they sent in? There was no other evidence supporting the anonymous phone call, and they have a history of prank calls. Realistically, they should have cordoned off the area, got eyes on the scene and evaluated how many hostages were there, where the gunman was, what the real threat was, how could he be taken out without harming civilians, whether there was cause for a hostage negotiation, etc.

    There's clearly a broken policy. I expect someone decided fast SWAT response was preferential to caution and more considered action, and so removed safe-guards to prevent these sorts of mistakes.
    Reply +1
  • ShiftyGeezer 28/08/2014

    @jabberwocky : If they're only told by one phone call, and there's no other evidence, and they've cleared out rooms where everyone's perfectly fine and calm and no-one's mentioning gun shots, and they have a history of hoax calls, they should be pretty aware that the chances of their being a legitimate threat are low. It's called situation evaluation. You don't act blindly, but with intelligent evaluation of circumstances.

    Also, they should have had eyes on the scene. The phone call reportedly claimed if officers enter, hostages would be shot. They didn't think to scope the situation out first?! What if the kid *was* a psycho and had TNT strapped to himself and detonated it the moment they came in? Or shot up hostages? The police burst in without any control of the situation and anything could have happened. Except it wasn't going to, because the situation didn't warrant a SWAT strike because the surroundings were trouble free.
    Reply +5
  • Ascend: Hand of Kul removed from Xbox 360 without warning, dev says

  • ShiftyGeezer 22/08/2014

    @DrStrangelove : whenever has a game's cancellation resulted in returned monies?? Plenty of online only games have had their servers turned off (eg. MAG). You don't get a refund. Reply +3
  • Watch Dogs is Ubisoft's last mature game for Wii U

  • ShiftyGeezer 19/08/2014

    @spamdangled : I'm not sure his use of 'mature' means anything other than the rating on the box. If you have objections to that definition, you need to levy them against the entirety of society, because 'mature' has always applied to violence, sex, abuse, lurid humour, etc., in music, movies, TV programmes, books and video games.

    Perhaps 'mature' is just a euphemism for 'horrible' that makes it a little easier for society to enjoy it's darker aspects?
    Reply +4
  • ShiftyGeezer 19/08/2014

    @spamdangled : It's an observation based on software sales. he's using generalisation. Of course not every Wii U owner is into 'casual shit', but based on the software statistics, 'mature games' don't sell well on the platform. Therefore there's no point spending money making them.

    Doesn't matter if Wii U has sold more than XB1 or PS4 or every console in history. If the software sales of certain genres and styles aren't there, you'd be wasting your time making those games.

    edit: And if you think so lowly of Ubisoft's catalogue, why does it bother you that they aren't releasing on Wii U?! Surely the correct response is 'good riddance'?
    Reply +37
  • Xbox boss Phil Spencer makes case for Tomb Raider exclusivity deal

  • ShiftyGeezer 18/08/2014

    @drofla.n : Indeed. If EG had released the full interview, it would have helped understand the situation. Haters still gonna hate, but the rest could be properly informed. Reply +2
  • The Crew won't release on PS3 and Wii U due to different "technical infrastructure"

  • ShiftyGeezer 15/08/2014

    @andrewchappell : okay, thanks for the info. Reply 0
  • ShiftyGeezer 14/08/2014

    @andrewchappell :
    In fact, with decent vector math code they can comfortably outperform the crappy jaguar chips in the next gen consoles.
    Right. With decent vector math code. But why develop their engine around that when that's not Jaguar's strong point? If porting from 6 general purpose OoOE cores to Xenon, I'd expect a considerable rewrite is necessary to extract the necessary performance from the 360 CPU.

    It's not about whether 360 is capable. I'm not saying Xenon, or Cell, aren't good enough. I'm saying that in porting effort, XB360 is non-trivial. I may over-rate the difficulty, but many here are definitely under-rating it and seem to think extracting performance from Xenon is easy and a port to 360 is cheap. Porting PC <> PS4 is easy. Porting PC/PS4 > XB1 is a bit tricky due to ESRAM. Porting PS4/XB1 to XB360 is quite complex. You're porting DX11+ GPU code to a DX9+ level GPU, 4GBs RAM to 512 MBs, and x64 OoO code to PPC in-order vector heavy code. I suppose if the PC version is targeting a low spec PC at DX9 and little VRAM, they may be partway there on the PC > 360 port.
    Reply +2