Sennex

Samuel L Jackson and Victoria Beckham sitting next to each other at Wimbledon http://uproxx.com/webculture/2014/07/samuel-l-jackson-and-victoria-beckham-sat-next-to-each-other-at-wimbledon-things-got-awkward/ can't embed the video, so just click the link and scroll down slightly to see her reaction.

if you notice issue's with PM's or the shoutbox let me know otherwise, carry on

Yep This is why I no longer care about CoD or BF titles, and for the most part ignore all gaming websites

I think people are resistant to change for change's sake. Or Change that turns out to be shitty and detrimental

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/469991/core-gamers-uncomfortable-with-change-says-peter-moore/ Core gamers uncomfortable with change, says Peter Moore EA COO says players should be more willing to embrace different models By Chris Scullion on Tuesday 1st Jul 2014 at 2:35 PM UTC "Core" gamers are uncomfortable with change and don't like embracing new business models, according to EA's Peter Moore. The publisher's COO told GamesIndustry that EA is excited about the future health of the industry, but conceded that some traditional gamers will take longer to convince that new innovations will be beneficial. "I think we're going into almost a golden age of gaming, where it doesn't matter where you are, at any time, any place, any price point, any amount of time, there's a game available to you," Moore said. "And our job as a company is to provide those game experiences. And then on our big franchises, tie them all together. "I think the challenge sometimes is that the growth of gaming... there's a core that doesn't quite feel comfortable with that. Your readers, the industry in particular. I don't get frustrated, but I scratch my head at times and say, 'Look. These are different times.' "And different times usually evoke different business models. Different consumers come in. They've got different expectations. And we can either ignore them or embrace them, and at EA, we've chosen to embrace them." Moore cited the advent of MP3s as an example of the danger the games industry could face if it doesn't adapt its content delivery policies. "We as an industry have to embrace change," he explained. "We can't be music. We cannot be music. "Because music said, 'Screw you. You're going to buy a CD for $16.99, and we're going to put 14 songs on there, two of which you care about, but you're going to buy our CD.' Then Shawn Fanning writes a line of code or two, Napster happens, and the consumers take control. "Creating music to sell is no longer a profitable concern. The business model has changed to concerts, corporate concerts, merchandise, things of that nature. Actually selling music is not a way of making money any more, except for a core group." One of the most notable concerns some gamers have is with the free-to-play model being adapted by many publishers and developers. "I think the core audience that dislikes the fact that there are play-for-free games and microtransactions built into those... fine, I get that," Moore said. "As you know, I read all the stuff, and it is the most intelligent commentary on the web as regards games. There's no doubt about that. But every now and again, and you've seen me do it, somebody will come in there and say something stupid that I think is beneath the site itself and beneath the industry." "I don't think anybody has to like it," Moore said. "I think that's where it goes. It's like me: I get grumpy about some things, but if the river of progress is flowing and I'm trying to paddle my canoe in the opposite direction, then eventually I'm just going to lose out. From the perspective of what needs to happen in this industry, we need to embrace the fact that billions of people are playing games now." Last year, Moore denied that EA lobbied for "gating functions" on used games, insisting that he in fact supports the pre-owned games industry.

I couldn't get into it to be honest, I got as far as the old couple driving me around and fighting the 2 giant asshole robots I will say this though, that might be the longest intro to a game ever (Outside the Final Fantasy series)

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/06/ouya-announces-60year-subscription-to-unlock-its-full-games-library/ Recent games shows like the Game Developers Conference and E3 have come and gone with little fanfare or hubbub surrounding the Android-powered Ouya console other than small promotional displays and a seemingly stillborn Ouya Everywhere initiative. This week, Ouya has tried yet again to get gamers' attention by way of a crazy, limited-time bargain: the Ouya All-Access Pass. The pass, which costs $60 and lasts for a full year, is meant to unlock seemingly unlimited access to the Ouya online store's major paid offerings: namely, "one-time purchases under $30 such as full-game unlocks and level-pack add-ons." However, the fine print explains that downloadable content designed to "enhance gameplay" with options such as "extra lives and power-ups" is not included in the All-Access Pass, which may create a blurry line between what content is and isn't included. Ouya's Chess 2, for example, doesn't include a full "unlock" purchase but rather coin packs used to enable online play at a cost per online session. The promotion comes on the heels of a March change in Ouya policy allowing developers to make paid games that don't include free demo versions or in-app purchases. That shift made particular sense for a wave of serious games coming to Ouya, including That Dragon, Cancer, and Thralled, whose sensitive content might be undermined by "pay more to keep going!" alerts mid-stream. Such paywalled games, combined with the likes of Double Fine's The Cave and Broken Age and upcoming delights like Toto Temple Deluxe, may add up to enough fun and value for $60... at least for new buyers who could also scoop up the system's few older hits as well. Conversely, Ouya devotees who have burnt through hits like Towerfall and Knightmare Tower may have to ask themselves whether Ouya has enough momentum to merit $60 more of must-play games from this point on. Though Ouya has yet to announce firm sales figures for either its hardware or software, developers have routinely complained about low sales for their Ouya fare. A Gamasutra report from last October saw that issue come up as a recurring theme, and our own interviews with game designers have echoed that sentiment in kind. In an e-mail interview, Chess 2 developer Zachary Burns told Ars that "there is no money in the [Ouya] userbase," though he was quick to express unabashed appreciation for the promotional and developmental support given by the official Ouya team. However, the company's best chance at expanding its userbase—the Ouya Everywhere initiative, which would deliver Ouya's storefront as an app for other Android living room devices—has seen no new announcements since Mad Catz announced signing on in March. The Amazon Fire TV may have quelled some of Ouya's momentum with its April launch, though not in the way gamers might have expected. If anything, Amazon Fire TV seriously damaged the Android-box movement thanks to its ho-hum game support and lack of long-term announcements. Worse, long-rumored plans for a "Twouya" follow-up console have yet to receive firm details. Ouya sent a statement to Ars Technica about the promotion, calling the All-Access Pass a "pilot subscription program" and saying, "For the price of one console game, players receive access to the entire OUYA catalog of more than 800 titles for a full year. It's just one of many things we're exploring to give players the best value and developers the best visibility. Results of this test will dictate if/how we proceed with an official subscription program." We've followed up with questions about current hardware and software sales figures, Ouya Everywhere plans, and whether game creators can expect to be compensated at a normal rate for All Access Pass unlocks. (As reported by Gamasutra, game creators received an e-mail confirming that pay rates for All Access unlocks will remain the same as for normal purchases.) We will update this post with any response.

Just finished Season 2 last night. Couldn't believe they had 3 damn cliff hangers in it, so messed up

Oh god, I hate that game, its just boring. I ended up getting the Dawn of War pack and Prison Architect

yea, this was one of the worst sales I have seen to be honest

Eddings and Feist do the same thing. It was fine at first, but not so much now

My only problem with the Balgariad series is it falls into Eddings trap of only XX person can solve YY problem. The Tamuli and Mallorean series were the same. The Althalus book was decent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Redemption_of_Althalus and was amusing because it was just so over the top

What is Mistborn about? I will look into it I am going to jump into the Longmire novels next. The TV show is amazing, I can't help but think the novels will be just as good

whats the run down on Artemis Fowl? It sounds like a chicken with a bow

Yea, thats not a bad synopsis There is a lot in it about Cheyenne/ American relations as well. Most of it makes you sit back and go WTF did we do to these people

Any of you guys watched this? It is still on the air, and the first two seasons are on Netflix

Robert Heinlein books: Starship Troopers The moon is a harsh mistress Time enough for love Jerry Pournelle: Falkenbergs Legion (There are 4 in this series) Every now and again I reread the Wheel of Time books, typically from Shadow Rising to Crown of Swords Every now and again I will reread some of David Eddings books Obviously Tolkein, but more so the Silmarillion and less so the LOTR This list could get huge. Lets try this, here are authors I read on a consistent basis, Michael Moorcock Dan Abnett Michael Stackpole David Sherman Chris Bunch John Wright William Dietz David Weber Steve Perry Steve White IDK, I read all the time, but I reread loads of my books, I typically can do an average paperback in about a week, and I am constantly reading.... I actually have a huge problem adding new authors to my list. Most authors bore the shit out of me

http://www.polygon.com/2014/6/24/5837722/battlefield-hardline-ea-dice-broken I once ran a Battlefield 1942 league in college, complete with squads, scheduled practices, a ranking system and tiered communications. It was a pain to set up, but it was a great time. Battlefield games all but defined my group of friends as we grew up and played through every sequel, and one thing stayed constant throughout our youth: The games never worked well at launch. The problem with the franchise goes deeper than a long history of terrible launches, however. Whatever culture kept the quality of games up and tried to preserve the value of the franchise is long dead, as evidenced by the current reality of the industry and past quotes from developer EA DICE itself. It's perfectly fine to still be a Battlefield fan, but buying Battlefield Hardline at launch is one of the worst bets you can make in gaming in 2014. The days of free content are long gone The culture behind DICE and the Battlefield series has been eroding for some time. "We don't ever want to charge for our maps and insisted to EA that this attitude was crucial when it came to keeping our community happy and playing together," DICE senior producer Patrick Bach told Xbox World 360 magazine, as reported by CVG back in 2010. "We're owned by EA but we're still very much DICE." Battlefield 4 has five paid add-on map packs. Whatever part was "still very much DICE" and not EA is long gone. There are 19 pieces of for-pay content for Battlefield 4 on the PlayStation Store. Today, all manner of DLC, including maps, is par for the course of the Battlefield franchise. Selling new content has become big business; why play the game when you can just pay $15 to unlock all the weapons? Purchase all the shortcuts on PC for $40! Subscribe to the expansion packs before you even know what they'll include! Free DLC and content as a pillar of the game is gone. What replaced it is the knowledge that gamers can and will be asked to pay for as much as possible. The annual franchise is here DICE's Patrick Bach once talked about the reasons behind Battlefield's lack of an annual release, the strategy that Activision has used to great success in bringing a new Call of Duty game to market every 12 months. This interview took place in 2011. "To us, we need the time to be able to create the next game that consumers will hopefully like. If we were to release another big Battlefield title next year, that would mean that we'd have less than a year to build it, and that would mean that we'd have to have another studio building it for us, which would mean it wouldn't have that DICE seal of approval, which would mean they'd just have to release a copy of the game we just released," he said in an interview. "Ugh, no." "EA would never force us to release a game every year," he continued. "I think that would dilute the vision of the franchise, and you will eventually kill the franchise by doing that." Battlefield Hardline is coming a year after the disastrous launch of Battlefield 4, and is being created by Visceral Games, the studio behind Dead Space. According to Bach, the franchise is now on the road to be "eventually" killed. His remarks are prescient, but sadly they're falling on the wrong side of history. ""EA would never force us to release a game every year," he continued. "I think that would dilute the vision of the franchise, and you will eventually kill the franchise by doing that."" Everything that was supposed to define the culture and level of quality of Battlefield has been taken away, and what remains is a giant, lumbering franchise that is focused on maximizing revenue and shortening production cycles. EA's goal as a publicly traded company is to maximize value for shareholders, and not even Patrick Bach can stand in the way of EA getting every dollar it can out of a successful franchise to make that happen. EA is claiming that it's doing all it can to make sure Hardline has a successful, stable launch, but it said similar things before the launch of Battlefield 4, and the company is embroiled in a class-action lawsuit for allegedly hiding the true status of the game from shareholders. So what's the point of bringing this all up now? Ben Gilbert wrote an interesting post about the terrible launch of Battlefield 3 back in 2011, and he's another writer who has gone through many of the typically terrible launches of the Battlefield games. Here are three quotes about the launches of Battlefield: Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3, and Battlefield 1943: "Despite having a major infrastructure in place, the peak traffic ... has been huge, 400 percent higher than any other Battlefield's peak simultaneous users. The teams will continue to monitor the services closely. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience and will provide further updates on the latest developments as they are relevant." "In terms of the network services, we have had unprecedented and historic peaks in terms of the activity that we're getting from the Battlefield community and players, and it's caused parts of our networks to experience some outages." "We have full support of EA to add as many servers as takes and then some so that everyone can play. This work has already started and servers will be added around the clock with teams working to cover this 24 hours a day so not a moment is wasted. You will be able to play this game and play it lag-free!" It's hard to tell them apart, isn't it? Battlefield games are going to launch with the same issues, it's going to take a while to fix them and the same excuses will be trotted out as an explanation. Keep in mind that article, with those quotes, was written before EA and DICE dropped the ball for months on the Battlefield 4 launch. The series had a terrible track record even before Battlefield 4 fell as it left the gate. To say that these problems now come as a surprise, or that any of the companies involved don't see them coming, is folly. It's become impossible to pretend that this isn't a trend, or to become hopeful the problems will go away. "We've taught EA how to treat us, and this is the result" Hardline may have had a good beta, but Battlefield games always do. There may be good explanations for why this won't happen again, but that happens before the launch of every game. EA continues this because the Battlefield franchise is profitable; we as players have taught them that we'll buy anyway, and continue to support games that don't work at launch. To quote terrible daytime television therapy: We've taught EA how to treat us, and this is the result. "Calendar year-to-date, FIFA 14, Titanfall and Battlefield 4 were three of the top five best-selling titles across all platforms in the Western World," the company's earnings report stated in May 2014. Why ship working products when the market says you don't need to do so in order to succeed? How to fight back This is my advice: Don't pre-order Hardline. Don't give EA a dollar for the game, no matter the incentives and "free" guns or whatever. Don't buy the game at launch — wait until the servers are stable and you know it works. I'm not saying boycott EA, or the franchise; if Hardline comes out, is stable and is fun to play, my friends and I will be in the back of the line to throw our money down for copies. But that's the place to be for this game: the back of the line. Let everyone else test things for you. I hope EA has learned its lesson, but we have no reason to believe any of these promises. They come with every game, and every game has a rocky launch. If Hardline enjoys strong pre-order support and strong day-one sales, the message will be clear: It's okay to ship now and fix later. Let's send a message that we haven't forgotten, and hang onto our $60 until the company has learned its lesson. Every dollar that's spent on Hardline before the game comes out is a vote for things continuing down an anti-consumer path. If the game is a hit before its launch, that sends a message that we're OK with business as usual, and business as usual has become pretty terrible.

I looked at Prison Architect, but just can't make the jump also, Saints Row 4, although I want that on ps3, so thats easy to skip

I vote for checking out Blacklight Retribution.

same shit has happened to me a few times now. I have like 22$ left in my steam account today, I sort of want Sime City 4, but IDK just nothing good in this steam sale so far

my thoughts on this: I didn't enjoy my time in this game. It felt like Brink to me

Still no Stalker... Or anything really damn I'm old