what games?

But all I play is TERA.

>>10585
My thoughts exactly.

whelp, chivalry has that free weekend thing. not gonna last much longer but there's always that.

>>10593
I used to play it. Was fun for an while but got old very quickly.

if anyone wants to play war thunder we're playing it now, join in on irc!

>>10605
>irc
How awful.

http://warthunder.com/en/registration?r=userinvite_19724733
Do it.

Are there any guildwars 2 players? I'd play bad mmos with tc.

>>10650
Oh god no.

>>10607
War thunder was cool for a while, but became unplayable. got to where every time I tryed to play it would crash before starting, still a beta after all. After that the patches would destroy my internet connection so I gave up on it.

>>10683
What mode and nation did you play? I was playing Sim battles and Germany

>>10684
Mostly arcade mode with occasional Realistic, and exclusively japan.

>>10686
Oh god....

>>10686
JAPAN STRONK

A few of us from the irc tried playing robocraft (F2P). Pretty shitty game to be honest. Poorly made and buggy all around. One person couldn't even get it to run on their system. I continued to play it simply out of boredom and finding the construction system to be decent. The game is practically unplayable without hacks mind you. without hacking it takes waaaay to much grinding to get in game money or upgrade points. Whenever I play I have to fix the accuracy of the turret guns since it's hard to hit anything with them by default. railguns (sniper rifles) are fucking cheap, but not as cheap as the people who used them from the top of the skybox with tiny nearly impossible to hit crafts. it's hard to build anything cool with the 1511 cpu limit. I've tried bypassing it but I don't think it's possible. For some reason everyone uses "w" instead of the word "how" in chats, I don't know if it's a new fad or what but it's dumb.

<- took me hours to build this thing and get it flying semi decently. handles like a brick hanging on a string and might as well be made of tinfoil the thing gets destroyed so easily.

So, do any of you guys here play games with each other regularly then?

After years of not caring, I finally built a PC I could game with.
I expected way more good looking games on Steam to be honest.

"Good looking" as in looks fun to play and/or has a nice story, not just graphics.

Post edited on 31st Aug 2014, 3:01pm

>>10833
welcome to the indie game hell known as steam.

>>10833
Tell me about it. I mainly use my PC for emulation now, Steam releases have nosedived in quality.
If you want an easy way to get games, check out the Humble Bundles. The current one has Crusader Kings II which is one of my all-time favorite PC games.

>>10833
I got through that too.
You try a bit of everything, complete like 20 games and then the novelty wears off and all you're left with is games exactly the same as the ones you just played but with minor gameplay changes, the countless indie games no one buys and the AA games every mass of retards buy.
The thing that gets me madder is those meme games everyone buys even though no one actually likes them. Like Goat Simulator and Air Control.
"lol this guy made the shittiest and buggiest game on steam, so funny. let's buy him a new house and car."
PC is the masterrace at anything but having good games. I was happier playing those terrible new JRPGs on my PS3. Hyperdimension Neptunia still has more story than half of Steam's library.

>>10839
yeah totally. People act like indie games are so creative and original, but it's all minecraft clones, zombie shit.

>>10839
Your problem is thinking that Steam shit represents the PC games library.

>PC is the masterrace at anything but having good games.
Your inherent bitterness towards PC gaming/gamers aside, you also seem to forget that virtually every game worth getting that's released on the PS3/360 (and the new generation consoles) has a PC version these days- and typically with better resolution and mod support if you're into that sort of thing. The point being that aside from its own exclusives, it plays the majority of the good games from consoles as well, and won't run you up as much money in the long run either (even if you invest in a "high end" PC).

Post edited on 1st Sep 2014, 2:54pm

>>10841
>you also seem to forget that virtually every game worth getting that's released on the PS3/360 (and the new generation consoles) has a PC version these days
What do you consider games worth getting? Things like Watch Dogs?
In my experience PC / Console multiplats are mostly boring AAA action games badly ported just to make some more money. Of course there are also some very good games but they aren't that many.
The 2 Fallouts are the first examples that come to mind. They're both great games and mods make them a lot greater and can also fix the bugs that aren't already patched.
GTA IV was a terrible port to pc, with 2 DRMs if you buy from Steam as if 1 wasn't enough. But the Xlive one can easily be avoided at the cost of multiplayer and mods can make the SP 10 times more fun.

>>10842
>What do you consider games worth getting? Things like Watch Dogs?
Why would you even assume I'd say something like that?

You already mentioned the Fallout games, and they are a good example, but the majority of games released on consoles do have a PC version out of the gate if not a port these days. You can find a PC version of damn near anything without even bringing emulation into the argument, but what as for fairly recent games: What about Saints Row (yes, 2 had a sloppy port but 3 and 4 were much better), Splinter Cell, The Witcher, Dishonored, Dead Space, Metro, SF4, the first two Arkham games, Borderlands/2, and Diablo? I can't be assed to look up a gigantic list, and I'm sure you can find a complaint for every game there if you try, but they're not a bunch of Call of Duty clones as you seem to insinuate multiplatform games are. And given the choice, I'd almost always rather play a game on my PC rather than on my consoles.

That's not to say consoles are devoid of any decent exclusive titles, but they're few and far between, and the library just as loaded up with generic FPS trash as Steam is with bad indie game clones and joke games.

>>10842
>The 2 Fallouts are the first examples that come to mind. They're both great games and mods make them a lot greater and can also fix the bugs that aren't already patched.
You mean Fallout and Fallout 2?

I just found out that the review site I used to lurk gave its first 10 to The Last Of Us. The first 10 in more than a decade of reviewing.
After that, they gave the second 10 to GTA V.
What the fuck, and I thought that site was still pure.

>>10911
Reviews are never correct, they can not be due to the wavering differences between men and the tell-tale differences between numbers.

Reviews can only be as objective as the person who creates them is.

Basically, reviews are what is killing video games. We're all putting numbers on fun, and fun is a very minutely detailed thing and each person has their own.

'Mathematics would certainly have not come into existence if one had known from the beginning that there was in nature no exactly straight line, no actual circle, no absolute magnitude.' - Friedrich Nietzsche

>>11059
>Basically, reviews are what is killing video games. We're all putting numbers on fun, and fun is a very minutely detailed thing and each person has their own.

Reviews may or may not be killing videogames, but it's not because they use numbers to express their opinions. Film reviewers have been using them for a long time, and it didn't ruin movies when they did. Game reviewers using numbers poorly might be a symptom of their inadequacy.

>>11061
People who play games tend to be unintelligent morons. So they're easily influenced and affected by other peoples opinions and quick number scores. Hell, I know a lot of people skip game reviews altogether and look at the score; the 'gamer' does not have the attention span or capabilities to read full reviews and critique them (the review) properly, as cinephiles may. The cinema audience is no doubt more intelligent than the gaming audience, we know, even if we don't want to, that this is true.

This readiness to critique a game review soley on its score leads authors of reviews to be scared of using lower numbered scores and offending their dimwitted audience, and/or publishers seizing the importance of the number and paying large sums of money for higher scores because they know that's all 'gamers' look at.

So yes, numbers are not good to use when you're around idiots. They take it too seriously, that the number is the be all and end all of a critique. Those more cultured, like the cinema audience, can see that numbers are not definitive.

You've probably concluded that this is biased because I am a cinephile, but no, I don't watch films on a regular basis since most come out of the U.S and I don't find the U.S to be all that great when it comes to art or entertainment.

>>11074
In that case gamers being morons is what is killing games.

>>11074
The gamer you're talking about is comparable to the movie watcher who only watches transformers and superhero movies, someone who doesn't care much for the medium. I trust very few sites for video game reviews, and I never take numerical reviews at face value - my favorite site doesn't even use numbers. If you want to lump us all in with the people who read Polygon and similar sites, then I'll feel free to group you with those that only go by IMDB or rotten tomatoes scores.

>>11077
Can you post a link to that review site without scores?

>>11086
http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/

>>11074
>The cinema audience is no doubt more intelligent
>Those more cultured, like the cinema audience
Yes, I can see how "cultured" and "intelligent" the average moviegoer is by the continued popularity of rehashed generic action flicks and shit like Twilight. Now, I'd never claim that "gamers" as a whole are intelligent or even not idiots. I will say, though, that it is sheer fallacy to believe that the cinema audience is any more cultured or intelligent than gamers. Just because movie critics are more credible than their gaming industry equivalents does not mean that the average movie patron isn't a complete dipshit.

>You've probably concluded that this is biased because I am a cinephile, but no, I don't watch films on a regular basis since most come out of the U.S and I don't find the U.S to be all that great when it comes to art or entertainment.
How convenient. So you're willing to use, from what you described, the lowest common denominator as the example to represent the whole of the gaming community- but now you're telling me most movies made don't count towards the cinematic medium, at least in your eyes? Logically speaking, whether you like it or not, if we're talking about both communities as a whole here, you have to consider the AVERAGE consumer. You're portraying cinephiles as cultured, intelligent people when in reality, most movie fans just go out to see those brainless American films you hate and couldn't give less of a shit about the more thought provoking ones.

>>11099
>the lowest common denominator as the example to represent the whole of the gaming community
No, I was using the average.

>You're portraying cinephiles as cultured, intelligent people when in reality, most movie fans just go out to see those brainless American films you hate and couldn't give less of a shit about the more thought provoking ones.
You see, I was talking about the average enthuasist for each medium. The average enthusiast for films (whom I referred to as cinephiles) is more cultured than the average enthusiast for video games.

Those people who go see mindless films now and again do so not to watch the film specifically, but it is something to do when they hang out with their friends. They're not enthusiast for the film.

>>11100
Well we certainly know which crowd is the most pretentious

>>11100
>No, I was using the average.
Saying that the average gamer is quote an "unintelligent moron" and even incapable of reading is a real stretch, even if they are idiots as a whole.

>The average enthusiast for films (whom I referred to as cinephiles) is more cultured than the average enthusiast for video games.
I'd have to disagree with you there. I don't see cinephiles/film enthusiasts to be any less stupid or uncultured than gamers, on average.

>Those people who go see mindless films now and again do so not to watch the film specifically, but it is something to do when they hang out with their friends. They're not enthusiast for the film.
An enthusiast is not the average consumer. Again, you can't discredit these people seeing mindless films as being not "true" movie fans just because they aren't film connoisseurs, per se; because it's their gaming equivalent that gives gaming fans as a whole such a bad image. The actual film enthusiasts are outnumbered by people that are flocking to watch mindless films with their friends once in a while, just like the gamers that appreciate atmospheric and thought-provoking games are outnumbered by the crowds that just pick up rehashed FPS games every year.

>Saying that the average gamer is quote an "unintelligent moron" and even incapable of reading is a real stretch, even if they are idiots as a whole.
Incapable not in the lack of intellect renders them unable to read, but the lack of culture leads them to not enjoy reading.

>I'd have to disagree with you there. I don't see cinephiles/film enthusiasts to be any less stupid or uncultured than gamers, on average.
Most things that have been around longer have better culture.

>An enthusiast is not the average consumer. Again, you can't discredit these people seeing mindless films as being not "true" movie fans just because they aren't film connoisseurs,
Yes I can. Because I those guys are simply not the guys I was referring to ever.

>because it's their gaming equivalent that gives gaming fans as a whole such a bad image.
No it's not. Those are not he people to whom I referred to as idiots. Those gamers do not care for reviews in the first place, they play whatever their mates play for fun.

You'll need to re-read what I wrote >>11074
.

>>11103
Why are you even on the video games board?

>>11103
So now you're backpedaling and changing your argument to comparing gaming enthusiasts and film enthusiasts rather than the average that 'does not care for the medium', despite clearly stating that you were going by averages earlier (in this post >>11100)?

That being the case, I would wager it incredibly ignorant to think that an enthuiast or connoisseur of any type would simply throw caution to the wind and base their opinions of games completely by review scores (especially given how unreliable gaming critics are), without even looking at the review itself. If those assertions were true, then the gaming medium wouldn't have any real enthusiasts whatsoever, and I do not at all believe that to be true. As >>11077 said,

>If you want to lump us all in with the people who read Polygon and similar sites, then I'll feel free to group you with those that only go by IMDB or rotten tomatoes scores.

Post edited on 21st Oct 2014, 7:12pm

People who read Polygon or Rotten Tomatoes scores are still on the more informed/hardcore end of the scale. The "unintelligent morons" are the people who just see all the superhero movies. or for real stupidity in gaming, take a look at whats happening in the App Store or Google Play.

>>11105
>So now you're backpedaling and changing your argument to comparing gaming enthusiasts and film enthusiasts rather than the average that 'does not care for the medium', despite clearly stating that you were going by averages earlier (in this post ...
Now I don't know if you're pretending to be stupid or not, it even says in that post 'average enthusiast'.

>That being the case...
I wasn't talking about those who blindly accept reviews, I was talking about those who blindly hate reviews. I think this is were you may have gone off track. And I even said that in my previous post. Man, I don't know what you're smoking, you seem to be unable to read. Well, that'd just lump you into the group I mention then. Oh, right, I never lumped anyone here into that group (to begin with), I gave definition to that group, made it exist, but I never put anyone, personally, into it, you assumed that you were in that group, which I believe is some Freudian subconscious thing.

>>11108
>it even says in that post 'average enthusiast'.
Which directly contradicts what you said in the very same post:
>No, I was using the average.
See, I can make cute semantics arguments too. Again, the point stands that saying any "enthusiast" is on the level of what you initially implied is outright ridiculous. Someone that's uncultured and bases opinions on review scores one way or the other could hardly be called an "enthusiast".

>I wasn't talking about those who blindly accept reviews, I was talking about those who blindly hate reviews.
At this point I have to think you're either trolling or flat out grasping at straws. Regardless of whether you accept a positive review score as a decision to play a game or accept a negative review as a decision to not play one, you're still blindly following reviews- which was your initial argument against gamers, and exactly what I said there (completely basing opinions on reviews). I didn't even say "accept".

>Oh, right, I never lumped anyone here into that group (to begin with)
Is that so?

>I gave definition to that group
Which is:
>People who play games tend to be unintelligent morons.
and
>gaming enthusiast

>made it exist
Weaving a whiny sweeping generalisation of a group does not make it exist in reality.

>personally, into it, you assumed that you were in that group
See above. I don't need to spell everything out for you, do I?

Of course I'm sure you knew all of this already, and you're just nitpicking at semantics because you have no actual substance left to form an argument with. For someone that enjoys groaning about the perceived low intelligence of everyone else, you're doing a very poor job of substantiating your claims or making yourself look like anything other than a pretentious moron yourself.

>>11110
I see this is the limit of the average gaming enthusiast's intelligence.

>does not make it exist in reality.
What is reality? If I can see it, if I can say it, it exist, because if it doesn't exist, how can I percieve it? You can define reality, but you can't confirm reality, reality and ficition are one in the same, both come from the mind of man, given existence by man. Reality and existence are not the same. Ex'is'tence is what is, 'real'ity is what is real. But our existence is not a confirmed reality, the same as fiction is not a confirmed reality. So if me saying it exist is not a reality, then nothing in this existence is a reality.

>>11111
Good job arguing semantics instead of addressing his points.

>>11111
I have no interest in your pseudo-intellectual thoughts or ignorant beliefs of solipsism. Do you have any legitimate points to make?

>>11113
I honestly do not care about your dimwittedness and inability to contemplate reality. Do you have any reason to exist?

>>11114
Not believing in solipsism means I'm "unable to contemplate reality"? Yeah, that makes sense. Unless, of course, your views of reality and existence are as erroneous as your self-evaluation of your intellect. Discussing philosophy with a teenager bearing unwarranted self importance (or someone with the mentality of one) is ultimately pointless, not to mention you've failed to read the board subject for a second time now- we ARE on a board for "video games", even if you don't like them. Not film. Not philosophy.

In any case, given that your last two posts have been nothing but petty name-calling to preserve your "intelligent and cultured" persona, I think it's safe to assume you're done discussing anything of relevance to the actual topic.

>>11115
I don't hate video games, in fact I like them very much.

But, just as Caesar loved the Roman Republic he saw that it was tainted and crossed the Rubicon to purge it of evil, I too feel the same way about video game audience.

You're problem is you've taken what I've said too personally. You should reconsider your importance to my statements.

>>11116
Despite your repeated attempts to pin the fault of your idiotic statements on others' misunderstandings, you've made it abundantly clear who you were referring to multiple times with your "grouping".

>>11108
>that'd just lump you into the group I mention
>>11111
>I see this is the limit of the average gaming enthusiast's intelligence.

Not to mention the various statements regarding all gaming enthusiasts that others have already pointed out. I don't think anyone is misunderstanding your bullshit, though it doesn't surprise me that you'd sooner think that than actually work on making a valid point.

Post edited on 22nd Oct 2014, 10:30pm

>>11117
>regarding all gaming enthusiasts
Funny, I don't recall saying 'all' ever.

>>11118
Okay, I'll play your stupid semantics game. No, you didn't use the term "all" itself. Care to touch on the other points made? Or are you just going to ignore them like the rest of the ones you couldn't refute?

>>11119
>Care to touch on the other points made?
I don't see the point. I mean, it's quite obvious that the average gaming enthusiast aren't a cultured people. You can play your semantics game alone, because this is what I meant from the beginning even if I didn't use the right words and you got confused.

That is the second biggest no true scottish question beggar I've seen all year.

Its just video games. Don't get angry over it.

>>11143
Translation: "I can't."

Wow, I just looked at the steam group for the first time, and one of my steam friends is in it. I had no idea he was a tohno-chan user.

121 people in my friends list, 176 in the group. Blows my mind.

>>11158
I just looked at the steam group for the first time and it's full of people I would never believe they post on tc

>>11169

most freely available to join clubs are like that.

really, the exception is hotglue, which is invite-only, but equally if not more so retarded in that way.

190 people in the steam group. The hell are these people that aren't on the chan or irc. Did they join because they saw an anime girl Lol.

>>11339
Yes. That's pretty common for steam groups.

Some people just like to collect them.

Any of you play FFXIV:ARR? Add me up, I'm scrub though.

http://steamcommunity.com/id/stalwartvii

>>11398
is that link wrong or did you delete your account?

I just resubbed to FFXIV. if anyone here is on Behemoth server let me know (but I don't actually raid or play endgame)

>>11398
I'm on Leviathan if you happen to be there and are still interested in playing.

I sent you an invite on steam (Exousia)

>>11431
>>11442
http://steamcommunity.com/id/sanaekochiyabest/

Oh, I'm sorry I changed the name of my profile because paranoid, lol. I'm on Jenova, but honestly will probably end up moving eventually.

MOWAS 2 is free to play for 3 days
It's a very nice WW2 RTS, anyone in europe wanna play with me?
I've already completed almost every singleplayer mission but never played with anyone online
We can do co-op if you still have to learn the very basics

http://store.steampowered.com/app/244450/

>>11449
Downloadin~

>>11450
I'm adding you if you want to play.
I said "anyone in europe" to have a good ping but oh well, it should be fine

Is anyone on gazellegames?
How is the content and is it all seeded well?

Is there any good site to keep track of videogames you play or want like MAL?
I remember trying one but it missed many games, maybe because it was new but I don't even remember the name anymore.

does anyone interact across tc steam

>>11566
I don't really follow gaming sites all to much, but the only site that I know that does something like that is GameFAQs.

>>11566
I've never used MAL, so what sort of features are you looking for?

KF2 anyone?

>>11581
Not that guy but MAL just lists:

>What anime you've started

>How far through (I don't think this could be implemented, maybe with a total hours part instead)

>What anime you've completed

Also with the dates for start/finish

>>11588
Don't forget on hold, plan to watch, and dropped.

>>11566
There is myvideogamelist but the site is slow as hell with the updates and you have to manually add everything to your list.

>>11588
>>11589
I see. I've never used it but I think Grouvee does that but I don't know if it's any good. Apparently they import their data from another site so it's up to date. There is also backloggery but you have to input it all manually and it was slow when I took a look.

I find it easier to have it all in a spreadsheet.

Does anyone here have King of Fighters 2k2? or KOF 13?

does anyone play csgo

>>11736
I do also. Rank: GN4
I keep moving up to MG2 and back down.

anyone wants to be friends?

Does anyone want to play Magicka with me? Its hype died down years ago and I never got to play multiplayer of it with anyone.

>>12151

magicka 1 or 2?

>>12150
>>11736
I do and do.
Add me if you want to play or talk, I'm Global in CS:GO but will play with anyone.
http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198168132772

>>12263
will delete you in a day

Dota 2 patch 7.00 hits in 2-3 hours.

http://steamcommunity.com/id/emergencyvideogamecompanion

Let's be friends!

>>12180
Apologies for the late delay. Magicka 1.

I didn't know that 325 people posted here, amazing.

>>13691
They don't. Maybe some of them actively lurk, but as with the case of any imagboard, branch-off community on a more polular "platform", it's mostly made up of people who maybe visted the original a few times.

>>13691
you would like this then:
http://s11.flagcounter.com/more90/3741/1