Someone explain this news article to me
-
http://autoomobile.com/news/fallout-4-developers-reuse-skyrim-engine/10019152/
- Article is 100% pure bullshitting speculation written by "staff"
- There's a second article EQUALLY SPECULATION, also written by "staff" published today as well, which contains this sentence:
There have been a lot of speculation in the pass but the arrival of Josh Hamrick had cause a lot of buzz.
- Speculation isn't even based on anything in the news (it's not like Bethesda said "we have a new game" yesterday)
- Blog/news site seems to be a weird conglomeration of Automobile, Gaming and Gadget news
- Wait a minute, every article is by "staff"
- Is this site run by bots? Is this a new bullshit-bot in action?
- Google News considers this site a legitimate source of news
-
All of their staff are really good at hiding their online presence, or do not exist.
-
If those articles are news, then I'm the Eiffel Tower.
-
Generally, articles written by "staff" are either that way because they're too low-quality for someone to want to put their name on, or they're written by a bot. (Look at your local new site's sports page-- 80% of the sports page, those play-by-play game descriptions, are written by bots.)
-
Their oldest "news" page:
http://autoomobile.com/page/380/
Actual names!
Also, oldest articles is from last week.
-
I follow several Fallout news outlets and I haven't read anything about this[1]. OTOH, comparing the same engine between a 4 year period is dumb. This things evolve and by the time Skyrim was released the game might have been "reduced" to allow for the Xbox 360 and PS3 to play the game.
Total click bait.
[1] Actually, there haven't been any real news about Fallout 4 since Feb. 2013
-
AUTOOMOBILE Malaysia has been an authority for commentary and information on vehicles and electronics. Producing engaging content and an unbiased viewpoint, our staff have a broad understanding and experience in automotive industry. This makes AUTOOMOBILE the a reputable source for everything on wheels!
Yet most of their articles are about games and phones
-
[1] Actually, there haven't been any real news about Fallout 4 since Feb. 2013
Right; that's why stupid me (a Fallout fan) clicked the headline. I foolishly thought maybe Bethesda had announced something, or there was a leak of concept art or engine code or something that would provide a basis for that story.
(Which, for the record, is fucking obvious. Bethesda has produced something like 6 record-breaking super-highly-reviewed games in a row with the Gamebryo/Creation engine, there's no way they'd use something different for Fallout 4. Or Elder Scrolls VI. They're not stupid. "Ford's next new product may be an automobile!")
-
So why did you link to a BS site?
I know this is TDWTF, but it sounds like they don't deserve the traffic.
-
Because it would have been stupid for me to post this without linking to it?
-
OTOH, comparing the same engine between a 4 year period is dumb. This things evolve
Agreed. I mean, the "same engine" for Portal 2 as was used in HL2, even though the releases of those games were almost 7 years apart. And sure, maybe Source doesn't quite match up to other...LOADING
LOADING
LOADING
LOADING
LOADING
(sorry, not sure what happened there) ...engines, but I think it still looks pretty good in the later incarnations.
-
Aren't you glad you don't use an ad blocker so the writers of that site get the support they deserve?
-
I clicked the link; it's a fair cop.
-
The last rumour I head was Fallout 4 would be set in Chicago, which is probably just some random made-up nonsense anyway...
-
Chicago, which is probably just some random made-up nonsense
Alas, Chicago actually exists, although many of its voters are fictitious.
-
1) Article is 100% pure bullshitting speculation written by "staff"
I think you have summarised it pretty well. Also, a quick Google search turns up a forum post about the same thing in 2013.
This is so news, lol.
-
I was wearing a mini-skirt; it's fair to cop a feel.
Don't give in to victim blaming! It's not your fault you were taken advantage of!
-
What "fans" are they polling anyways? Sounds like yet another case of "I has blog, I is obviously journalist".
-
Because it would have been stupid for me to post this without linking to it?
No, it wouldn't.And of course, you could have not posted at all.
But I'll grant you this as being noteworthy if true:
@blakeyrat said:7) Google News considers this site a legitimate source of news
-
Although the Elder Scrolls Skyrim graphics werenât bad, it is already four years old and we have been seeing some pretty impressive games this few years that manages to top what Skyrim offered so it would be a step backwards of the new Fallout 4 arrives with the older engine.
Tangentially, the grammar isn't too bad (as far as I'm aware), but implies the writer arrived there from a different primary language.
I have no issues with this. This could be the site for a single gaming fanatic.
-
the grammar isn't too bad (as far as I'm aware),
Commas. Commas are your friends. Use them (but don't overuse them).
-
https://www.youtube.com/embed/Q45XPRdVAEM?start=824&end=844
Yes, I had to. Been a while at least (and it's only 20 seconds)
Edit: wait... how did... WHAT?
The timestamps were good when I tested them! Is Discourse now bending time, too?
-
Bookmarked to watch later. I left my earphones at home, so no YT at work today.
-
No, it's YouTube... it keeps rewinding 20 seconds back from the point where I want it to start?
-
Wow people complain about me giving this seedy news site clicks, you flat-out link a Red Dwarf episode blatantly stolen from the BBC and getting YouTube ad revenue for some asshole.
That's a hundred times worse than clicking a link to some news article. Cripes.
I'm not a fan of ContentID but that shit's just blatant. Goddamned, I can't believe my videos were being black-holed while that one's just sitting there, fuck you YouTube.
-
I can't believe my videos were being black-holed while that one's just sitting there, fuck you YouTube.
According to the comments, the poster cropped the picture quite heavily in a deliberate (and apparently so far successful) attempt to defeat ContentID.
-
Is it that the site is useless? (because I can find you lots of that)
Or that the Google recommended the site.
-
Because it would have been stupid for me to post this without linking to it?
Not if you provided enough quotes to give context, and decided to deny them the links.
-
Ok well I didn't decide to do that, so you'll just have to cope somehow.
-
Aren't you glad you don't use an ad blocker so the writers of that site get the support they deserve?
That's OK, I clicked the link twice to compensate for him.
-
Ok well I didn't decide to do that, so you'll just have to cope somehow.
You imply I care about your opinion.
-
-
This post is deleted!
