briantw

1 hour ago, psynetik123 said:

I wonder how long it's going to take for Sony to port TLOU2 over to PC.

Clearly, PC gamers are going to be clamouring for the second game to be released on PC as soon as possible, given the success of the TV show and the very likely success of the first game on PC, but it took them ten years since the release of the first game on PS3 to finally port it to PC.

It's possible they'll do a complete graphical remake like they did for Part 1 on PS5, but the graphics and mocap in Part 2 are already amazing as they are, so I'm not even sure what could be improved.

Ten years ago, Sony wasn't releasing any of their exclusives on PC.  Now, it seems like they're releasing most of them a few years after their console release.  The second game is already a couple of years old, so I'm guessing next year for the PC release since Part One comes out later this month.  

And there's no chance they'll rebuild it from the ground up.  There's no need with Part 2.  It's still one of the best looking games out there and only two years old.

1 hour ago, sifth said:

Did it bother anyone else that the doctor was clearly not performing the operation in a clean room? Last I heard, vaccines can only be created in a clean room. Not that I'd expect Naughty Dog to know the science behind this or anything. Also how the heck would they mass produce something like that, in a broken world?

I mean, that’s probably the cleanest room they’ve got.  It’s the post-apocalypse.  Shit’s fucked. 

19 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

If Kyle can't fix him, nobody can.

He's not broken.  He just sucks.

So, like, are there going to be any quarterbacks in the NFC next year?

1 hour ago, Ran said:

They do not know that she is the cure. They do not know that the cure requires her death. They do not know anything about what they are going to do. They have a certain belief that they are dead set on following this path despite there being no particular urgency in not fully exploring their options.

I wouldn't say there's no urgency.  They live in a highly dangerous world where life is cheap, and they're currently occupying a hospital with working power and, presumably, medicine.  They'd be an obvious target, and that's not even getting into the constant threat that the infected pose, even to Ellie.  She may not turn if they bite her, but as they said early on, that won't stop an infected from tearing her apart.  Every day they hold off on doing what they feel they need to do in order to manufacture a cure is a day that their surgeon may be killed or Ellie may die.

That, of course, doesn't mean they had to kill her the same day.  I just think it's false to say there's no urgency here.  They've likely been working on a cure for close to twenty years and this is the closest they've come.

Yeah, that was just as good as the game.  Honestly, I think it worked even better on the show because they could use the music and cinematography to portray the horror of what Joel was doing much better than when you're in control and have to gun everyone down yourself, which puts you in survival mode.

4 hours ago, Werthead said:

They said they did, but no, not really. The action in ME1 is still noticeably clunkier than in ME2. They did remove weapons restrictions from classes though.

I seem to remember it being a bit more enjoyable when I played the Legendary version, but it had been so long since I played the original that all I really remembered was that the gameplay was borderline unfun at times.  It might just be that it wasn't as bad as I remembered it, though.

5 hours ago, Werthead said:

I suspect the remake would not satisfy a lot of fans. The remake that they were working on would have almost certainly been an action game playing much closer to the likes of Jedi Fallen Order and only some nominal RPG systems. The fear is that a full remake of the original would feel too obtuse of a lot of mainstream modern gamers (i.e. not having direct control of every swing in combat).

They could get away with a remaster, but I think the game is too old for them to do a really satisfying remaster up to modern standards.

I mean, the gameplay was never the highlight of KOTOR to begin with.  If they made it better but kept the story mostly unchanged (I'd be fine with some minor re-writes to tighten the dialogue, same as I expect them to do for the remake of The Witcher, although that one needs it far more), I'd be on board.  That being said, if you remove most of the RPG elements, it's not the same game.  I would not be on board with that.

If I recall, didn't they improve the gameplay from the original Mass Effect in the Legendary Edition to make it play more like the second game?  

While I agree that Lamar representing himself is likely annoying when it comes to negotiations, he’s by no means the only player who has ever represented himself, nor the only high profile or highly paid player.  

DeAndre Hopkins represented himself during his contract extension with the Cardinals.  Jacoby Brissett represents himself.  Richard Sherman, Russell Okung, Laremy Tunsil, Bobby Wagner…not a lot of players do it, but certainly enough that Lamar doing it isn’t the issue here. 

8 minutes ago, Rhom said:

It’s fascinating to me how quickly perceptions change.  Before last season, plenty of people had the Panthers as a playoff team.  Now they have one of the worst rosters in the league.

Who had the Panthers as a playoff team a year ago?  Their roster was mediocre last offseason and it's gotten significantly worse with the absence of CMC and DJ Moore, their two best players offensively by a mile.  Their best WR right now is Terrace Marshall.

The only shot they had last year at making the postseason was the general weakness of the NFC and the fact that two of the teams in their division had even worse rosters and a lot of young, unproven skill players.

10 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I agree, but following up on your next post, I don't think it would be wise for them to get Jackson either. Teams that are a QB away should be fighting for him. So should teams that are missing a QB and need one more year of retooling to be competitive. The Panthers aren't that at all. They have one of the worst rosters in the league. If anything they should be in the market to trade back because they need as many top 100 picks as they can get over the next few years to rebuild from basically scratch. The smart move for them would be to build a good line on both sides first and get some nice DBs. Do that for two years or so and then go get your young QB and skill talent to place around him. Getting the QB first is dumb unless there's a generational talent available and this draft doesn't appear to have one (unlike next year's where there seems to be an obvious potential superstar).

Yeah, I was just saying if they were going to go in on a QB, at least Lamar Jackson might make them competitive, especially since they'd be keeping Moore and the two second rounders they gave up in the deal.  And as mentioned, if they waited until after the draft, they could have used that number nine on a good player.

I agree that they're a team that should be trading back and stockpiling draft capital.  This reeks of an impatient, impulsive owner.  I'm all too familiar with those.

1 minute ago, Maithanet said:

I don't think that's an overpay.  Moving from 9 to 1 costs a lot.  I saw multiple articles this week that the bears were looking to trade down twice, from 1 to 2 or 3, and then from there to like 7 or 9.  The Panthers had the offer enough to out bid that plan.

 

I think it's a massive overpay relative to their talent level.  They can't afford to give up all those assets.  Their team is complete trash, and they just sent out one of their only good players.  They're going to waste the QB's entire rookie contract rebuilding, and by that time he may be broken beyond repair.

12 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Yeah, that was an overpay. It's not like they were moving up to get a prospect like Lawrence. And I agree, all four QBs have red flags. Young is too small. Richardson is a project who probably needs to sit for at least a year. And Levis is wildly inaccurate. Stroud is probably the safest pick of the four, but I don't see him having a really high ceiling and OSU QBs for whatever reason haven't translated well in the NFL. 

If I'm the Panthers, I'd rather overpay Lamar Jackson, keep DJ Moore, and burn two firsts rather than give up all that to get one of those four guys.  The Panthers with Lamar Jackson are the instant favorites in that trash division.  Wait until after the draft to sign him and they could have kept that ninth pick to add some high end talent to the team.

That feels like an insane amount to give up to roll the dice on one of this year's QBs.  I don't think any one of them is a sure thing.

13 minutes ago, DMC said:

As an empiricist, I thought the NFLPA putting out the survey below was quite informative:

The players, clearly, don't have much of a problem with the training staff.  I'd think they're the best authority on such things.  The training ROOM, apparently, should be improved.  But blaming ShanaLynch or the training staff or anything else on losing both Purdy AND Johnson in the NFC championship game is manifestly stupid.  Bad luck is a thing.  Just saw it yesterday with the Yankees pitchers.

It’s worth noting that only two or three teams gave their team’s staff a bad grade.  The Ravens were obviously one. Don’t remember the others. 

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Oh come on now, the Niners love to invest in injury prone players. 

Usually they become injury prone after they’re there, right?  Not sure what they put in the water out there.  Lead, maybe?

22 minutes ago, DMC said:

Not when you have to pay Bosa, Williams, Deebo, Kittle, Warner, CMC, etc.  In other words, not when it prevents you from sustaining one of the best rosters in the NFL.  Lance and Purdy don't prevent that, at least for the time being.  So, glad you're not the Niners GM.

I’m not saying they could do it given their cap situation.  I don’t know enough about their books to know that. 

35 minutes ago, DMC said:

It's not going to happen, but anyone thinking the Niners should go after Lamar Jackson has a fundamental misunderstanding of why the Niners continue to be one of the best teams of the league.  As well as a fundamental misunderstanding of how to manage the salary cap.  Based on his demands IRT guaranteed money, I wouldn't pay Jackson even if it didn't cost at least the equivalent of two first round draft picks.  And neither, clearly, would most of the league.  That's what the Ravens are betting on, and thus far they appear to be right. 

Just because most of the league thinks Watson's contract was absurdly stupid and are unwilling to extend that precedent to Jackson doesn't really make it "collusion."  It's just called making rational decisions. 

And BTW, I really don't get the shit Shanahan and Lynch are getting here.  95% of teams in the NFL would KILL to have one or both running their coaching and/or personnel.  Of course, Paraag Marathe is their secret weapon, but the former two have already proved their worth.

I mean, if you’re going to light a couple of draft picks on fire, I’d rather walk out of it with Lamar Jackson than Trey Lance.  And I’m by no means his biggest fan. 

The Warriors play like a team of dudes who hate each other.  To get owned like that after all the shit Green talked about Brooks is just embarrassing. 

Another rule proposal...

If you yell "And 1" and miss the shot, it's a technical foul.

I’d like to propose a new rule.  If you miss the free throw, you don’t get to high five your teammates. 

4 minutes ago, Rhom said:

Its a difficult thing to gauge.  Kinda like Kaepernick in some ways.  You don't necessarily need to "collude" for 32 billionaires to all think essentially alike.

Heck, for the most part, all of us in this thread agree that giving Lamar a giant guaranteed deal is not a smart thing to do.

 

It's odd to me that they're coming out and saying that they won't be talking to him.  And it's crazy that teams without an answer at QB aren't even going to meet with him.  Maybe he wants more than you're ultimately willing to give him, but at least take the meeting.  If this all blows up in the Ravens' collective face, Lamar could be a free agent in two years and maybe your team left a good impression in the meeting and he's now got more reasonable demands.

6 minutes ago, Rhom said:

Are there any concerns that the league owners are colluding to prevent a new precedent of massive guaranteed deals?

That was my first thought as well when a couple different teams were so quick to put out the message that they weren't pursuing him at all.  That just seems insane to me.  You won't even take a meeting with him, Atlanta?  

10 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Atlanta can offer him exactly what he wants...

Or maybe not.

Seems like a terrible move by the Ravens.  They could have gotten way more than two firsts for him if they were going to let him go anyway.  And if they end up matching the deal, then they created all this bad blood with Jackson for nothing.