Forums / Discussion / General

It's here, it's huge, (about 17GB) and it's taking 5ever to download.

Who's excited to play it?

Too poor for fun games.

That's what torrents are for.

So you can afford it then

git rekt, boishock

Wonder how well it will run on my Single Core 2004 Dell with XP Service Pack 2.

Get an emulator which is actually just a new computer with the same desktop background.
I'm not advising selling drugs, but I'm not not advising selling drugs.

DOES NOT COMPUTE! MIND BLOWING IN 3… 2… 1…

But in all seriousness, I wouldn't recommend going for emulators.

What.

I'll probably rent it because I'm both poor and can't justify paying sixty bucks for something I'll beat in eight hours.

You all are definitely going to have to tell me how it is. It looks really good, but the gameplay of the first one ruined it for me.

I beat it, it's kinda short and they cut some stuff out in the first game. The game HEAVILY relies on exploration, which I kinda like but it felt like it missed something. Though the ending is complete mind fuck.

I wouldn't give it a 10/10, maybe an 8.8 – 9.2 but that's just me.

Though I've only played a couple of hours (parents divorced custody split 50/50, PS3 at my mom's house, because otherwise I would still be playing it.) I can certainly say that it's been fantastic so far :)

Do you mean a virtual machine?

Utorrent here i come.

Okay seriously fuck you guys who are torrenting it.

This. If you can't afford to buy a shirt you want at a store, does that justify shoplifting? No it does not. This isn't any different.

It's not that big a deal.

The proper analogy would be going down to the store and making a copy of a shirt, which isn't theft.

Oh come on, you know that's bullshit. If you don't pay for the game, it's theft. They didn't work for countless hours making their game just so cheap little shits could just play without paying.

Which would fall under copyright infringement, which is still illegal.

Before you guys go for the whole "Oh, but companies like Adobe are actually making more money!" argument, keep in mind that correlation is not equal to causation.

If every time I took a crap an African child died from a landmine, that doesn't necessarily mean that my craps cause landmines to explode. Just like with piracy – just because you're not contributing to sales doesn't mean you're somehow contributing to sales. If anything, I'm thinking it's the rise of video games and computers in general. In the case of Adobe, more people decided to work with Photoshop because it earned a reputation as a good product, more businesses decided to go into the image manipulation field, etc.

I don't think the opportunity to get a product for free would encourage people to buy said product, especially if the product was upwards of $700.

Stop being a fucking jackass and thumbing people down for talking politics, you look like an asshole. Speaking of cheap little shits, you're a cheap political shit. Fuck you.

But hey dumbass, you know what often happens? People that can pay, pay. And you know what? They're not even losing money. A lot of research has gone into the effects of file sharing and it's been found that if someone pirates something, they either wouldn't have bought it to begin with.

I'll link you to this European Commission report but since most people won't read it, I'll also post this quote.
"According to our results, a 10% increase inclicks on legal streaming websites lead to up to a 0.7% increase in clicks on legal digital pur-chases websites. We find important cross country difference in these effects"

So sorry bitch, but piracy actually increases revenues.

And it's still not theft BECAUSE NOTHING IS MISSING
THINK YOU FUCKING MORON

/endangryrant

I really hate it when people go thumbing down for legitimate political opinions and then go around just making shit up.

Illegal does not necessarily equal wrong.

Talking politics? Nah, you're just trying to justify theft. You can say whatever you want, but it is theft plain and simple. Why can't you just pay for it? What's the big deal? Also, downvoted for all the names you called me.

Edit: Katie, if you really think its ethical to expect people to work hard just so people can take it without paying, than I worry about you.

Right and wrong are unreliable concepts. I wouldn't rely on them to make any decision.

Still, whether illegal means right or wrong doesn't matter in this case. You're refusing to pay for a service others have worked hard to produce yet you still expect yourself to enjoy the service. This makes you no better than a child who wishes to reap all benefits while making no sacrifices.

That, in itself, is "wrong".

Katie, if you chose to have such a convenient definition of theft, fine, it's still theft in the eyes of the law and anyone with a brain though. Can you honestly tell me that its ok to expect games, movies, music, etc. for free because one guy paid for it and posted it online? You really think that's ok?

I didn't downvote this because of the piracy endorsement, I downvoted it because of the completely unnecessary name calling. Seriously, what the fuck.
Anyways, let's think of it this way. You spend years of your life creating something you've put your heart and soul in. It cost you millions of dollars to make and you're finally happy to see it come to fruition. Wouldn't you want to be reimbursed for all of the hard work you've done?
Honestly trying to justify piracy is a fucking joke. Say what you want, it's stealing and it's simply wrong. Pirates are the reason we have always-online DRM and obstructive digital purchases.

@cite

They do get reimbursed for their art. (Video games are art)

I'm not trying to endorse antipatronage. But those that can't pay shouldn't have to pay until they can pay. (And if they can't pay they don't lose money anyway) And of course, those that can pay should pay. But it's ridiculous to make copyright laws that bully art consumers. It's still not technically theft to copy and share files. You have to be practical. Because there is no technical theft involved, it's not appropriate to mandate a payment by law.

Here's a question: Do you think people should be required to pay to view this bust?

This bust is by living artist Jeff Koons, and is in the National Gallery of Scotland. By modern copyright logic, it should be considered theft to view that bust without paying.

OH AND GUESS WHAT GUYS

I PAY FOR VIDEO GAMES

@katie
"They do get reimbursed for their art. (Video games are art)
I’m not trying to endorse antipatronage. But those that can’t pay shouldn’t have to pay until they can pay"

Of course they should be expected to pay. I'm sorry if you are short of a few bucks, but if you have a modern gaming PC, chances are you can get the money in a couple days.

Also, what? you can't compare a bust to video games. I'll just say it again, piracy is theft and you can't justify it. We aren't talking about starving people stealing in order to survive, were at least you can understand why they do it, we are talking about kids unwilling to pay for a game.

This discussion is getting absurd.

Just because you can't pay for art doesn't mean you can still take home that art.

Imagine that you have a diary page that you only show to your close friends. One day however, one of them copies what's written on your page and shows it to EVERYONE. Now your embarrassing secret is out, and everyone's taunting you because of that dirty little secret.

You'd hate that friend forever, right? Why are we congratulating those who do the same with software?

What does that have to do with anything? Diaries aren't art, they're personal secrets. It's completely irrelevant.

I'm just going to say that digital pirating isn't causing a significant loss of revenue, therefore it isn't a tragic blow to the Games Industry, and therefor isn't that big a deal.
Well, also that Piracy is digital, so it is more as copying than it is theft. Saying it's just "theft" is incorrect, and you're just using that word to justify your senseless anger.

Also Katie stop tripping balls and getting worked up. Cite and Dac get over it, stick to the topic.

A lot of gamers don't have modern gaming PCs. I know I don't, and I know a lot of friends that don't. But there are lots and lots of people that barely have any money to spend on things. I'm one of them, and this is why I haven't replaced my PC in ages, and I'm a one console gamer these days.

And I can compare a bust to video games, they are both art.

……. Yeah ok, I'm going agree with joe and Cale here. This is getting absurd and I should just get back on topic before you start comparing video game piracy with Dalmatians. Though I won't agree that piracy isn't a big deal, cale

Anyways, so how is the new bioshock?

Remember the KYM RPG and all your rants towards it?

Good times, also very argument killing in this context.

Personally, I enjoyed it more than the first one.

Dac, I'm not trying to justify piracy here, I actually bought the game for 360. But remember that not all of us are spoiled rich kids (your words). If you see a starving orphan steal a bread, you won't bother as much with it as when a rich white boy does it. It certainly doesn't apply to anyone, but some people are simply forced to pirating because they lack the funds to properly purchase vidya.

Just bringing this up because people commonly argue in these cases from their own point of view, which in your case is having quite some bucks on the bank. Seeing how that makes you the 1%, we can confirm this doesn't apply to everyone.

It's a good game btw, certainly enjoying it so far.

So no one has solved my poorness and shitty computer problem yet.

@randomman

That's a good point. Maybe I'm being a little too hard on the people who have to do it to play games. I still don't condone piracy, but if a person really can't get it without pirating, I can't get too mad at them.

Anyways, I might give bioshock a try then. It looks pretty cool, flying city and shit.

Dalmatians aren't art. The animated film 101 Dalmatians is though.

The new BioShock is pretty damn good, and it seems to be rather long, but I could be wrong.
Gameplay's a bit different now, you don't have to deal with the handfuls of roaming enemies with shitloads of health in BioShock 1 now, or the massive swarms of supertough enemies in BioShock 2, this is more normal, you fight quite a few enemies that take a few shots to kill. Aside of the generic guys with guns, there are the heavy hitters, which are several kinds of tough enemies with mighty attacks like exploding fireballs and Gatling guns and shit.

It runs surprisingly well in 640×480

Still waiting for it to download :\. Stupid Steam was downloading at like 500 KB/s and now it's like 100 KB/s. Sigh.

The last time I recall paying for a game (or getting a new one, for that matter), was a Humble Bundle a while back. I figured Bioshock Infinite would be worth it though, since the first two were genius, coming from someone who never plays FPS games. Hopefully they do a multiplayer update (tried Bioshock 2's but it was dead). I usually play games that easily take up 100+ hours, and 12 hours seems kinda not worth it to me. Got Civilization V and XCOM legitly though, so yay.

Is anyone else done yet? I kind of just want to talk about my disappointments and annoyances with the plot, but I can't do so until a spoiler release is given an okay.

Use a spoiler box.

Meh, I'll just buy it instead. I don't want to download a torrent file having a capacity of almost 20 gigabytes. Don't want to slow my internet connection for more than a week.