[OT] Destiny

Jun 23, 2014
11
0
0
When people start resorting to sarcasm, it's usually a good sign that they are losing the argument on the merits.

1. The Division is---as of today---VAPORWARE. Destiny is a game that is ready for commercial release, while The Division still hasn't even produced a widely playable demo. It's not clear to what extent it will be massively-multiplayer...and some people question whether it will meet its 2015 release date.

2. Servers are simply computers. You can amplify computing power by networking the consoles (which is how Warframe handles the problem). It's just a less powerful, less reliable (though cheaper) way of addressing the problem.

3. It matters how many players activities you are trying to coordinate, and the complexity of the computing problems you are trying to solve in real-time. The fact that you don't seem to grasp this goes a long way to explaining the path this conversation has taken. Witcher 3 is a fairly simple computing problem to solve. "Big" in that setting is just a memory and graphics problem. Because you are only dealing with the activity of a single player....and the part of the world that is being depicted at any given time is the one that is player is occupying.

BF4 and Destiny are HIGHLY complex computing problems, as you are trying to coordinate the activities of dozens (in the case of BF4) to potentially thousands of players (each with different ping times) who are interacting in complex ways in constantly changing environments (esp in BF4)...and needing to be calculated and sent back to the indvidual consoles all in real time....and without detectable lag.

BF4 crashed-and-burned as a product because the servers and the code simply couldn't handle what was being demanded of it.

4. So what?? The moment Destiny ceases to be a massively-multiplayer game---YOU ARE NOW TALKING ABOUT A FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT GAME THAN THE ONE BUNGIE ENVISIONED AND SET OUT TO BUILD. It's like showing up to a baseball game and talking about how much better a FOOTBALL game would be. That's all-well-and-good (as a matter of personal preference) but that has nothing to do with the quality of the BASEBALL game, AS A BASEBALL game that's in front of you.

If you like sandbox games that are not massively-multiplayer...then, by all means, go play them. Go have fun with Watch_dogs. But, that's NOT what Destiny is, or was intended to be.

If you'd rather play football...fine. Don't show up at a baseball game and complain.

4. I played the original Planetside on a PC whose hardware wasn't even as capable as the current PS3. The problem with the PS3 (and part of the reason why XBox came to dominate last generation) is because its architecture made it difficult to program for. So it made it difficult to generate the multiplatform games that the major developers wanted to make. Which is why Sony with the PS4, took great pains this time around to make their console easy to program for.

The only impediment that the last gen consoles present to programmers today is that there hard limits to what they can do with these machines graphically. With most gamers participating on-line, much of the routine number crunching can be parallel processed in the cloud, allowing the software to operate with speeds the native hardware could not generate on their own.

...and Bungie essentially confirmed this. They basically stated that the only concession they have had to make in their game design as a result of multi-platforming (read last-gen hardware) was limiting frame rate to 30 FPS.

5. I own both an XBox One and a PS4, so I am quite familiar with what the graphics look like on both systems...as well as what Forza can do with cloud-based processing and "drivatars".

6. "Cross-gen" entails programming for computers with radically different hardware capabilities. What you consistently keep failing to grasp is that this is NOT the PS2 generation. When most players were gaming off-line, and were limited to the computing power that is "under the hood" of their console. Today most console gamers are gaming on-line (with broadband internet) in some fashion. WHICH ALLOWS THE CONSOLE TO UNLOAD PROCESSING OFF TO MORE MODERN AND POWERFUL computers in the cloud. Which allows a skilled programmer to compensate for the PS3s and XBox 360s less capable hardware. Except where graphics are concerned.

For example. I play Forza 5 on Xbox. Even though I always play as a single player, any "race" is a computing dance between my XB1 and their servers. Because each one of the cars I'm racing against is being controlled by a server-based "AI" that replicates the driving tendencies of actual human players. Which gives them their own individual character...and human unpredictability. All of which are rendered in real-time.

Because the computer power necessary calculate what these other "racers" are doing isn't under the hood of my XB1. The only thing the XB has to do is recieve the data necessary to depict those actions on my TV.

Although other game developers don't trumpet this, I gaurentee that you'll find similar things going on if you examined the code of cross-gen, massively multiplayer games intended for PS3 and XB360.
 

Omar

Forum Overseer
May 29, 2005
34,262
181
0
39
Addison, TX.
[QUOTE="kellygreen2, post: 6358110]When people start resorting to sarcasm, it's usually a good sign that they are losing the argument on the merits.

1. The Division is---as of today---VAPORWARE. Destiny is a game that is ready for commercial release, while The Division still hasn't even produced a widely playable demo. It's not clear to what extent it will be massively-multiplayer...and some people question whether it will meet its 2015 release date. [/QUOTE]so what you're saying is that they're going to say, "surprise motherfuckers, it's subscription-based." correct? oh that will go well!

2. Servers are simply computers. You can amplify computing power by networking the consoles (which is how Warframe handles the problem). It's just a less powerful, less reliable (though cheaper) way of addressing the problem.
i know what they are but i also know they haven't been used as extensively as you're implying. due to bandwidth reasons. could you give me a link that supports your claims? what exactly are they doing with the server computation power...i highly doubt they're doing anything to offload much graphics/RAM/CPU. maybe slight CPU.

3. It matters how many players activities you are trying to coordinate, and the complexity of the computing problems you are trying to solve in real-time. The fact that you don't seem to grasp this goes a long way to explaining the path this conversation has taken. Witcher 3 is a fairly simple computing problem to solve. "Big" in that setting is just a memory and graphics problem. Because you are only dealing with the activity of a single player....and the part of the world that is being depicted at any given time is the one that is player is occupying.
you're assuming that i'm not grasping, this entire conversation has been a straw man argument. you're making arguments out of nothing i mentioned.

The Witcher 3 doesn't need players but Division does but you've cleverly rebutted that earlier by calling it vaporware lol and that it comes out in 2015...which i don't know why that matters.

BF4 and Destiny are HIGHLY complex computing problems, as you are trying to coordinate the activities of dozens (in the case of BF4) to potentially thousands of players (each with different ping times) who are interacting in complex ways in constantly changing environments (esp in BF4)...and needing to be calculated and sent back to the indvidual consoles all in real time....and without detectable lag.
thousands of players? what are you talking about? lol. BF4 doesn't have more than 64 players at any point. unless you're talking about overall, in which case, again, you don't know what you're talking about. there's nothing new about keeping server data now than it was 10+ years ago. there's no different in how Destiny or BF4 deal with their users and the game than games did in the past.

they're just regular online games. they're not massive. BF4 doesn't need too much information, the changing environments in the game are pre-determined, it doesn't even need to go back and forth, it can be done locally because it's the same for everyone.

BF4 crashed-and-burned as a product because the servers and the code simply couldn't handle what was being demanded of it.
and what does that have to do with our convesation? BF3 did not crash and burn, it is just bad coding on their part. BF4 isn't much different than BF3 dude.

4. So what?? The moment Destiny ceases to be a massively-multiplayer game---YOU ARE NOW TALKING ABOUT A FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT GAME THAN THE ONE BUNGIE ENVISIONED AND SET OUT TO BUILD. It's like showing up to a baseball game and talking about how much better a FOOTBALL game would be. That's all-well-and-good (as a matter of personal preference) but that has nothing to do with the quality of the BASEBALL game, AS A BASEBALL game that's in front of you.
it's already not a massive multiplayer game. you yourself said that it wasn't in the beginning and now you're saying it is? lol how is it massive? so far it only supports 3 players in an entire area. how is that massive? the most i bet it supports is something like 40 people raids. i don't think it's going to have thousands of players on one map/server.

If you like sandbox games that are not massively-multiplayer...then, by all means, go play them. Go have fun with Watch_dogs. But, that's NOT what Destiny is, or was intended to be.
you don't even know what you're arguing about at this point.

If you'd rather play football...fine. Don't show up at a baseball game and complain.

4. I played the original Planetside on a PC whose hardware wasn't even as capable as the current PS3. The problem with the PS3 (and part of the reason why XBox came to dominate last generation) is because its architecture made it difficult to program for. So it made it difficult to generate the multiplatform games that the major developers wanted to make. Which is why Sony with the PS4, took great pains this time around to make their console easy to program for.
i know that PS3 was difficult but it was also very weak.
http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=2252&game=Planetside 2
look at the minimum specs, if your PC was less than the minimum (which is asking for 2x the VRAM PS3 has) then your game also ran shitty, which makes your point moot.

The only impediment that the last gen consoles present to programmers today is that there hard limits to what they can do with these machines graphically.
ok i'm done talking to you. you obviously don't get anything about game development. .

With most gamers participating on-line, much of the routine number crunching can be parallel processed in the cloud, allowing the software to operate with speeds the native hardware could not generate on their own.

...and Bungie essentially confirmed this. They basically stated that the only concession they have had to make in their game design as a result of multi-platforming (read last-gen hardware) was limiting frame rate to 30 FPS.
no that is a bunch of bologna. they aren't going to admit it.

5. I own both an XBox One and a PS4, so I am quite familiar with what the graphics look like on both systems...as well as what Forza can do with cloud-based processing and "drivatars".
they don't look as good as they can yet and that is because a lot of these games are cross-gen. again, look at FH2 and then DC and report back your findings.

6. "Cross-gen" entails programming for computers with radically different hardware capabilities. What you consistently keep failing to grasp is that this is NOT the PS2 generation. When most players were gaming off-line, and were limited to the computing power that is "under the hood" of their console. Today most console gamers are gaming on-line (with broadband internet) in some fashion. WHICH ALLOWS THE CONSOLE TO UNLOAD PROCESSING OFF TO MORE MODERN AND POWERFUL computers in the cloud. Which allows a skilled programmer to compensate for the PS3s and XBox 360s less capable hardware. Except where graphics are concerned.
NO IT DOESN'T! what makes you think they're using cloud power when the feature hasn't even been introduced yet! where do you come up with such bullshit!? for the love of Mary!

For example. I play Forza 5 on Xbox. Even though I always play as a single player, any "race" is a computing dance between my XB1 and their servers. Because each one of the cars I'm racing against is being controlled by a server-based "AI" that replicates the driving tendencies of actual human players. Which gives them their own individual character...and human unpredictability. All of which are rendered in real-time.
which has nothing to do with processing power that you speak of. it's AI processing which is a bit load off the CPU, that's it.

Because the computer power necessary calculate what these other "racers" are doing isn't under the hood of my XB1. The only thing the XB has to do is recieve the data necessary to depict those actions on my TV.

Although other game developers don't trumpet this, I gaurentee that you'll find similar things going on if you examined the code of cross-gen, massively multiplayer games intended for PS3 and XB360.
yeah, let's go with your guarantees and made up crap. great, thanks for wasting my time.
 
Jun 23, 2014
11
0
0
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ar-powerup1/

Looking at the architecture in Figure 3, you might wonder what number of concurrent players the gaming system can handle. There is no set answer. By default, a TGEA server is configured to handle a maximum of 64 players, but this configuration can be easily updated to any number. At some point, though, when a certain number of concurrent users are on a game server, performance will degrade to the point of making the game unplayable. There is no set limit to this number. Performance is dependent on a number of factors, such as:

The processing power and bandwidth available to a server.
The design of the world. A game consisting of simple avatars walking around a featureless plain, devoid of any objects, in a thick fog, can perform better than a highly interactive first-person shooter set in a richly detailed world full of numerous objects.
The game type. A virtual world or turn-based MMORPG does not require the networking fidelity and performance of a first-person shooter game.


http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ar-powerup3/ar-powerup3.html

"One intriguing possibility is to offload potentially computationally-intensive functions, such as AI, onto the Web server. This does not mean the "tactical" level AI of non-player characters (NPC) immediately responding to players, which should remain in the game server since it requires split second response time, but the more strategic level AI of how NPCs react to game conditions at a high level. "



http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/ne...rs-drivatar-system-works.html#~oJxrq1EFZkMh1u
 
Last edited:

Omar

Forum Overseer
May 29, 2005
34,262
181
0
39
Addison, TX.
[QUOTE="kellygreen2, post: 6358153]http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ar-powerup1/

Looking at the architecture in Figure 3, you might wonder what number of concurrent players the gaming system can handle. There is no set answer. By default, a TGEA server is configured to handle a maximum of 64 players, but this configuration can be easily updated to any number. At some point, though, when a certain number of concurrent users are on a game server, performance will degrade to the point of making the game unplayable. There is no set limit to this number. Performance is dependent on a number of factors, such as:

The processing power and bandwidth available to a server.
The design of the world. A game consisting of simple avatars walking around a featureless plain, devoid of any objects, in a thick fog, can perform better than a highly interactive first-person shooter set in a richly detailed world full of numerous objects.
The game type. A virtual world or turn-based MMORPG does not require the networking fidelity and performance of a first-person shooter game.


http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ar-powerup3/ar-powerup3.html[/quote]

could you please refrain from giving me MMO information? lol. we're not talking about MMOs.

"One intriguing possibility is to offload potentially computationally-intensive functions, such as AI, onto the Web server. This does not mean the "tactical" level AI of non-player characters (NPC) immediately responding to players, which should remain in the game server since it requires split second response time, but the more strategic level AI of how NPCs react to game conditions at a high level. "



http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/ne...rs-drivatar-system-works.html#~oJxrq1EFZkMh1u
and what new information is this bringing, i just said the same thing, it's offloading some AI computation, that's it.
 
Jun 23, 2014
11
0
0
As long as we are talking about Destiny, we ARE talking about MMOs. Although Bungie doesn't want to refer to Destiny as an MMO because of all the assumptions that many people have about what they are, and how they should play.....Destiny is a Massively Multi-player On-line, Action Role-playing Game that is a First-Person Shooter (MMO-ARPG-FPS).

...and the articles I posted clearly outline the problems that the structural "seamlessness" you want would cause for MMO-FPS like Destiny.

...and that those problems are an increased need for computing power on the SERVER side of the equation not the CLIENT (console)

Now if you want to discuss something OTHER than this----then this debate is over. Because---like I said earlier---you're into wanting to evaluate a baseball game by football standards. Which is frankly pointless and non-sensical. For any-and-all purposes beyond your personal gaming preferences.

Which there are plenty of options out there to satisfy. Like I said. Feel free to go have fun with Watch_dogs. But Watch_dogs is a fundamentally different game than Destiny both in intention, scope, and the server-side computing power necessary to support it....and I really have no interest in apples-to-lawn-furniture comparisons.

...oh, and---by the way--- the Forza 5 example is just one of MANY ways that cloud-based parallel processing can unburden client computers and dramatically improve their performance as a result.

Microsoft also has a good video on YouTube showing how much of a difference it can make in the speed and smoothness of depicting "destructible enviroments" graphically. When one off-loads calculating the physics of debris movement to cloud-based servers, rather than trying to run those calculations client-side, while trying to also graphically depict them in real time.

The difference is *startling* to say the least.
 
Last edited:

Omar

Forum Overseer
May 29, 2005
34,262
181
0
39
Addison, TX.
you're absolutely right, this debate is over because you've completely missed every single point that was made in it.

1) Destiny is not an MMO because an MMO is "capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously." if you can show me otherwise in Destiny, i'm all ears.

Bungie isn't calling it an MMO because it's not one. They can't call it that. They can call it a massive game, but not an MMO because that again implies what i just wrote above.

2) i never said that i want the game to be an MMO. I said i want it to be more massive (without loading). that doesn't mean I'm saying i want it to be an MMO.

3) you're not telling me anything new, i know what cloud processing is capable of, but that has nothing to do with our conversation because it's not usable yet and hasn't been used yet. so it doesn't have anything to do with our conversation.

you were, up until now, implying that it was being used in several games and how one of these games failed because it was doing too much (when it wasn't and when it wasn't even using the tech you speak of).

I think i've heard enough. Thank you.
 
Jun 23, 2014
11
0
0
1. Sorry Alice, This isn't Wonderland. So simply saying something over and over again, doesn't make it so. There are articles up and down the internet explaining that Destiny is IN FACT an MMO-FPS, and explaining why Bungie and Activision want to avoid that lable....and the associations with World of Warcraft/Everquest (and their fantasy themes, play mechanics and business models) that inevitably go with it.

(There's a fantastic Wallstcheatsheet blog article that is dedicated to discussing JUST this point. Google it.)

Destiny is an MMO that is a FPS...and requires the same sort of server infrastructure in orde to create the massively-multiplayer, persistent world they envisioned their game unfolding in.

2. You've made it quite clear what you want. You want an seamless, open-world sandbox. What you want isn't that difficult to understand. WHAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND, is what is necessary to make that happen WITH THE GAME THAT BUNGIE SET OUT TO MAKE WITH DESTINY. The console is not the limiting factor...server-side computing power (and budgetary constraints) are.

What you "want" is a game that is fundamentally different than what Bungie set out to make. You want a game that is more like Watch_dogs or Witcher 3. Which are big, open-world games that are largely single player with only occasional, limited forms of multi-player activity...if any at all. Which is NOT the game Bungie wanted with Destiny....and what you are asking for burns up vital computing resources for a task that does little to advance the narrative that BUNGIE wanted to tell with Destiny.

...and the kind of game you want persents a MUCH simpler computing problem than what Bungie is doing with Destiny, or what DICE tried to do with Battlefield 4.

So, beyond your personal preferences---and understanding the computing infrastructure of MMO games---- all of this is a pointless exercise.

3. I know I'm not telling you anything new. But it is also clear that you don't really have an understanding of what we are talking about, because---as the articles I linked discuss---what I'm talking about is being used everyday.

...and Sony---with Playstation TV---is betting will be the next-phase of gaming. That the "next gen" after PS4 won't be a powerful desktop client computer, but an Apple TV-like streaming device with ALL major computing tasks taking place in the cloud.

Oh...and by the way....Sony plans on eventually STREAMING its entire CATALOG of PS3 games with Playstation TV.

So, like I said, client side power isn't the issue here.
 
Last edited:

Omar

Forum Overseer
May 29, 2005
34,262
181
0
39
Addison, TX.
[QUOTE="kellygreen2, post: 6358716]1. Sorry Alice, This isn't Wonderland. So simply saying something over and over again, doesn't make it so. There are articles up and down the internet explaining that Destiny is IN FACT an MMO-FPS, and explaining why Bungie and Activision want to avoid that lable....and the associations with World of Warcraft/Everquest (and their fantasy themes, play mechanics and business models) that inevitably go with it.

(There's a fantastic Wallstcheatsheet blog article that is dedicated to discussing JUST this point. Google it.)

Destiny is an MMO that is a FPS...and requires the same sort of server infrastructure in orde to create the massively-multiplayer, persistent world they envisioned their game unfolding in. [/quote]since you must have gotten your information somewhere, show me this information that proves that Destiny is an MMO shooter.

2. You've made it quite clear what you want. You want an seamless, open-world sandbox. What you want isn't that difficult to understand. WHAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND, is what is necessary to make that happen WITH THE GAME THAT BUNGIE SET OUT TO MAKE WITH DESTINY. The console is not the limiting factor...server-side computing power (and budgetary constraints) are.
no, sandbox is something on top of being open. and no, they don't need server-side computing to make an open world. lol jeeeeesussss!

What you "want" is a game that is fundamentally different than what Bungie set out to make. You want a game that is more like Watch_dogs or Witcher 3. Which are big, open-world games that are largely single player with only occasional, limited forms of multi-player activity...if any at all. Which is NOT the game Bungie wanted with Destiny....and what you are asking for burns up vital computing resources for a task that does little to advance the narrative that BUNGIE wanted to tell with Destiny.
do you read your own posts? could you show me where i said that i wanted watch_dogs or even witcher 3 (maybe if it had an online mode) and most importantly "only occasional, limited forms of multi-player activity" lol wow where do you get this information? you think they have to make it like the other games in order to succeed this? wow why am i wasting my time with you lol. how old are you again sir? i really hope you're not taking care of an innocent family. God help them!

also the game doesn't need to be different just because it has smoother transitions. you don't have to load up the entire world in order to make an open world. you continue to ignore this point.

...and the kind of game you want persents a MUCH simpler computing problem than what Bungie is doing with Destiny, or what DICE tried to do with Battlefield 4.
??? lol smh.

So, beyond your personal preferences---and understanding the computing infrastructure of MMO games---- all of this is a pointless exercise.
I don't want an MMO game! i know that "some" things that you're speaking about applies to MMO games, this doesn't. also server-computation doesn't need an MMO to work, they can do that regardless and it's not even fully fledged yet! not even close!

3. I know I'm not telling you anything new. But it is also clear that you don't really have an understanding of what we are talking about, because---as the articles I linked discuss---what I'm talking about is being used everyday.
lol you are delusional.

...and Sony---with Playstation TV---is betting will be the next-phase of gaming. That the "next gen" after PS4 won't be a powerful desktop client computer, but an Apple TV-like streaming device with ALL major computing tasks taking place in the cloud.
yeah, i think we pretty much all have been expecting that since 2005.

Oh...and by the way....Sony plans on eventually STREAMING its entire CATALOG of PS3 games with Playstation TV.

So, like I said, client side power isn't the issue here.
no one said that it can't be done but what you're speaking about is something that they need to provide for practically free. streaming games costs money. what Sony is doing isn't anything new, it's what OnLive has been doing for years. that's not just server-side computation, that's doing all the work on a cloud and then you're streaming the visual part of it.

what they're trying to do is find a cheap way to do this in video games but most of the calculations will be done on the local hardware (console). so in that essence it's different from streaming games.
 

Omar

Forum Overseer
May 29, 2005
34,262
181
0
39
Addison, TX.
[QUOTE="kellygreen2, post: 6353223]The game that Bungie appears to be making is NOT an "MMO"[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE="kellygreen2, post: 6358180]As long as we are talking about Destiny, we ARE talking about MMOs.[/QUOTE]

:lol: alright this has been fun bud.
 
Jun 23, 2014
11
0
0
1. You DO understand the function that putting something in *quotation marks* serves, right??

2. wallstcheatsheet.com/.../why-activision-and-bungie-arent-calling-destiny-an- mmo.html/?...


http://www.kotaku.com.au/2011/02/breaking-bungies-destiny-is-an-fps-mmo-claims-fired-contractor/

http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming...tiny-the-first-of-which-is-an-xbox-exclusive/

http://siliconsasquatch.com/2014/06/18/destiny-manifested-thoughts-on-bungies-shooter-mmo/

"Destiny would be called an MMO if it weren’t another shooter. Previews, and Bungie itself, haven’t hit on just how much this console game behaves like a PC MMO. It’s jarring at first.

After my first mission I loaded the game’s hub world, the last bastion of humanity on a ruined future Earth. While fairly small, the Tower has every conceivable NPC trope from any online RPG, minus the crafting stations.Tthe game’s player-versus-player mode, the Crucible, even gives marks for winning which can be handed in for epic-tier equipment. Former WoW players will flash back to more feverish times, for sure."

Need I go??

3. Which is why I said "open-world sandbox". If I thought that "open-world" and "sand-box" meant the same thing, putting them together would have been redundant. You're grasping at straws.

4. How old am I? I'm 46 years old, I've been using computers for 30 years and I've been a PC gamer for nearly 20 years. One who is currently getting back into console gaming because I don't like playing action games on PCs...and this current generation of consoles are finally producing games that are graphically worth stepping away from PCs to play.

As I stated earlier. Age isn't the problem here. The problem is that I know what I'm talking about, and you don't....and you are trying to cover up for the fact that you don't know what you're talking about with sarcasm, bluster, and mis-direction...

..and you're hoping that I'm young-and-foolish enough not to recognize that this is what you are doing.

Unfortunately, for you, I'm not.

5. Sadly, you are clueless to the fact that you are contradicting yourself.

Even if the all the computing is done server-side, it still needs to respond to user input in real-time, and depict (graphically) the outcome of that interaction on the client side.

..and if you can successfully off-load ALL of that computing, then it is even easier to off-load only PART of that computing load.

Which---as I stated in my first post---DEMONSTRATES that the console/client is not the computing power bottleneck here.

Ends of story.
 
Last edited:
Jun 4, 2007
13,612
320
83
I was just curious as to how well you guys are doing with your loot. I have this Blue Pistol that's just a beast. It's called Regulator MK. 56.

My armor isn't anything to brag about yet.

 
Last edited:

Sylar

Elite Sage
Aug 30, 2008
10,618
57
48
31
UK
I haven't got anything special yet, I either have common or uncommon gear, hoping to get some decent stuff soon though
 

TidalPhoenix

The Last of Us
Staff member
Dec 16, 2006
12,743
116
63
All my stuff sucks ballz at the moment, but I intend to morph into a beautiful swan. A beautiful exotic armour and weapon wielding swan.
 

Captncoke49

Superior Member
Feb 8, 2006
510
2
18
Frederick,MD
Two, shoot me a friend request! I've been looking for you Tidal, time zone difference is making everything difficult.

As for armor/ weapons, I don't have anything special armor wise, but I have a nice auto rifle, the Cydonia AR13.
 
Last edited:

Sylar

Elite Sage
Aug 30, 2008
10,618
57
48
31
UK
[QUOTE="Two4DaMoney, post: 6378898]I was just curious as to how well you guys are doing with your loot. I have this Blue Pistol that's just a beast. It's called Regulator MK. 56.

My armor isn't anything to brag about yet.

[/QUOTE]

Did you get that on a mission or just doing Scouting stuff? I'm level 15 now and I haven't come across anything other than green items lol
 

PS4freak

Counting Mod
Staff member
May 15, 2006
17,374
128
63
Louisiana
Basically wanted to use this as a page where users looking to play can post on here that they are looking for teammates. Post PSN, class, and level so you can be matched up best. If there is already a thread like this let me know and I'll delete this thread.
 

Captncoke49

Superior Member
Feb 8, 2006
510
2
18
Frederick,MD
The closest thread to this one is the "can we set up some games" thread. But it doesn't list everyone's classes and level.

My name here is the same as my PSN and I'm a level 12 Warlock. TidalPhoenix is the only person I've teamed up with so far. I need more of you guys are on my friends list. Lol
 

Duffman

Selected Members Council
Staff member
Oct 14, 2013
14,672
39
48
Chillin by the poo!!
Same, my PSN name is by the side and in my signature, I am currently level 4 hunter but hope to rank up quickly very soon! In the UK and mostly online at 9.00pm weekdays and 2.00pm Saturdays :icon_thumright:
 

Captncoke49

Superior Member
Feb 8, 2006
510
2
18
Frederick,MD
[QUOTE="Duffman, post: 6379281]Oh I am Duffman19864 by the way, not gold106gti just to make people aware[/QUOTE]

I realized that after I sent the request to gold106gti. I cancelled it and sent it to your proper ID. Lol
 

Locomotive

Dedicated Member
Feb 25, 2012
1,033
6
0
The PSU clan is non active.

I've seen 2 ppl in the clan on during the loads of times I've been on and one of them is like lvl 3.

Anyway, I'm level 14 or 15....I can't remember. I think 15.
 

PS4freak

Counting Mod
Staff member
May 15, 2006
17,374
128
63
Louisiana
[QUOTE="Locomotive, post: 6379320]The PSU clan is non active.

I've seen 2 ppl in the clan on during the loads of times I've been on and one of them is like lvl 3.

Anyway, I'm level 14 or 15....I can't remember. I think 15.[/QUOTE]

I didn't even know we had a clan. Definitely need to get that up and moving. Someone want to take that on? Make a thread for members to sign up.
 

-Dj-

Veteran
May 8, 2009
4,450
52
48
31
[QUOTE="PS4freak, post: 6379330]I didn't even know we had a clan. Definitely need to get that up and moving. Someone want to take that on? Make a thread for members to sign up.[/QUOTE]
There was one for gta5 but didn't have anyone from the site
 

Yuuichi

Miqo'te Bard
Oct 25, 2009
8,118
73
0
Fresh 20 warlock. Guess I'll beat story then gear grind. Psn:yuuichix

on tap a talk on LG g2 and I suck at typing on phones so forgive my typo errors.