Volourn

Didn't play that game. I only bothered with FO3 because of liking the first two games. My bad.

"a real moral choice would have been to become a nihilistic, demon-tainted, blood-magic junkie who becomes a Dark Warden, becomes one with the Archdemon and helps The Blight spread even further afield." Wouldn't work 'cause it be just like FO1. You would no longer be yourself, and it be game over much like when you are dumped in the vats. Anyone, btw, who tries to claim that the Dwarven Politics choice isn't a shades of gray, they ar ejust making things up, and have some weird defintion of shades of gray to be sure.

"It's a little hard to get upset about Fallout 3 writing when the rest of the industry is at the same level." No, this isn't true. FO3 has some of the worst writing ever.

"Just think, we could have had this version of Fallout 3. Not exactly awe inspiring and really looks old and tired. I'm glad we have the Fallout 3 that did come out." No way could Interplay/BIS' FO3 be worse than one of the worse RPGs ever created. Then again, Bethesda makes crap games and have been getting away with it for 2+ decades. FO 1 = Awesome game FO 2 = Awesomer game FO3 = One of the worst games evar

"and if you thinks the orzamar throne situation provided genuine moral ambiguity, then you is no doubt the lowest common denominator that bio is trying to appeal to. congrats on living up to such a lofty standard." Have you played the dwarf commoner origin? No, it's not so clear cut and dry tool. Heck, even as a dwarf noble origin, it's not so clear cut and dry tool. Then again, youa re the one who keeps saying rogues are useless yet uses them. LMAO The problem is you see everything in balck and white so you can never see things in gray. problem is your perception of what is gray NOT the game's.

"By all means, spill the beans." No, I've been pushing the edge of spoilers as is in these Obsidian threadsw when Obsidian has banned me from spoiling things. If you want specific examples from me ask me on the BIO/COdex/ITS forums, or wait until I do my review where I will spoil everything in a billion words or less. I've alreayd been proven to be correct in this thread about the whole Morrigan thing depsite an accusation I'm using the spoiler thing as a cop out. Yet, I've yet to recieve an apology (nor do i expect one on the net). I've played the game so I don't have to make stuff up like some people seem to feel the need to. "Yep, me too. A lose-lose situation. Either way, I felt like crap." There's lots of situations like this where I made x decision that wasn't clear cut, or I actually *thoguht* it was clear cut but it actually *wasn't*. btw, In a semi spoiler, the situation you meet Sten in, is a perfect example of this, and is one of the best things I've seen in a CRPG when dealing with recruiting a joinable npc. And, i say that, despite hating Sten.

Poor Grom is so so wrong. Then again, he's the one who claims that rogues are useless in the game and that's been proven wrong already. One example is the choice of who to put on the dwarven throne. There is no good vs evil quick fix answer there, and if oftend epends on the movitivaion. In fact, the viewpoint there can heavily change on whether you played the Dwarf Noble or Commoner Origins. Compared to the vast majority of games includinhg your precious BG2, DA is as 'gray' as we're gonna get in a RPG. Then there's the chocies dealing with SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER, and SPOILER. Tsk, tsk, Grom. Rogues are 'useless'. L0LZ

"you see about 30 locked chests and 5 unlocked ones, and lots of traps, whereas for the city elf you encounter very little of them)" Eh? Just played this last night. Lots of locked chests. I know, becasue I got annoyed not being able to open them. L0L And, there a few traps espicially one nasty one.

"Morrigan is very eager for you to save Sten and a blood mage in Redcliffe, and you get a lot of approval points if you do." Aw, man. Why did you have to leave the goof off so easy with these spoilers? By, gah, he needs to squirm. "Translation: I have none as I am talking out of my arse... again. " So, anymnore crap you want speel as you try to claim garbage about me? "Which brings us to our next point. Not all the blood mages in the tower were aligned/stayed aligned with Uldred (and his plan to turn the mages into abominations). Indeed, most of the rebel mages were motivated by escape. Look at it from the mages perspective. The Circle is but a glorified gilded cage, their home and prison both. Virtually, all the mages were drafted to the circle against their wishes. Is not freedom a fundamental right? Does not everyone have a right to personal liberty until they it has been forfeited? I don't believe that it is evil at all to for one of those mages to try and escape. And excluding the blood mages aligned with Uldred, the rebels only crimes were revolting against their Templar captors. It's not unreasonable to believe that the Templars are the ones with the lower moral standing, as they're the one's keeping the mages imprisoned against their wishes. On top of that, the Templars were poised to invoke their Right of Annulment. If this doesn't qualify as evil, I'm not sure what does. It essentially a blanket sentence of genocide - no due process, no fundamental safeguards for individual rights. And given that the Circle was locked up by the Templars, it would not be unreasonable for an ordinary prudent mage in her position to presume your presence in the tower was on behalf of the Templars. So I don't blame her one bit for attacking you on sight." Game. Set. Match. Doing the Chantry/Templar's dirty work is sickening. They are most definitely in the wrong which is why the mean boss analogy isw rong. The boss is a slaver. Now, if he was, would you be so quick to judge? Why should someone feel remorse for wanting to escape their prison. Also, some of the CT mages are all for the Chantry because they've been brainwashed into believing that controlling mages is a good thing.

BUF PHI CHI CIN PIT INDY KC NE NO CAR JXV SD NYG SEA MIN BAL

"Please cite specific examples" No. Make me. I only do such favors for people whose opinions actually matter, and aren't hostile towards me. C&C, man, C&C! Anyways, Obsidian doesn't allow spoilers without tags which means I'm banned. I've skirted the line too much a sis. If you want actual spoiler exmaples, read my posts on the BIO boards. "I was just joking based on the fun dialogue after a mission. I haven't finished the game yet." Thought that was a possibility; but just ahd to make sure that not all DA endings are happy happy land.

" Slaughtering foes while Manson plays - nope " I don't rcall BIo ro EA promising in a solemn oath that Marilyn Manson music would be playing in game while you slaughtered eniemies?

"Yeah, DA is real dark, man." All in the eye of the beholder. What does 'dark' even mean? And, can one assume there is an actual defintion that any two people agree with? Read the BIO baords. There's a lot of talk of whether or not DA is dark. However, that's not the important part. The important part of that thread are the examples given in the thread of what people think are dark. Opinions vary so greatly that calling soemthing 'dark' (just as 'low magic') is frivlous useless hype that utterly means nothing. Examples such as LOTR, FR, PST, plus a host of books and movies were thrown out. One guy give an example of in order for soemthing to be 'dark', rape has to be protrayed as a positive thing or the protaginists all have to die. "Saved the princess and got offered half the kingdom." One potential ending. Multiple endings in DA don't end so happily. I know the one I got was bittersweet... P.S. How many games allow you the option to murder a kid, and it actually potentially being for a 'good' cause? NOW, that's dark. Or, SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER, SPOILER, or SPOILER. Not even Bl got that dark or complex.

"But it seems like the darkspawn themselves were very ill-thought out in the lore" Totally bdisagree. The darkspawn are fantastic, and fit perfetcly. The best thing is we still don't neccessarily know the truth of them. From how they are created, their connection to the archdemon to heck not even knowing what their actual purpose is or even if they have an actual purpose outside of total destruction. "really show how different the focused archdemon-lead darkspawn is from the deep roads darkspawn," How can they show this at this time as the archdemon is around so even the usual character 'deep road' darkspawn are more focused now. Depending what the plan is for DA2 where we might not have anothe rblight, we might see how the darkspawn are sans archdemon influence. "And did 95% of the Denerim populace die in the first 5 minutes of the wave? Nobody to rescue, no resistance to go help." *sigh* Sometimes I wonde rif people conviently 'forget' things when it hurts their point. Did you enter the elven alienage? I did, and I saw people asking for help to hold off the darkspawn which led to a nice start to one of the best fights in the game. And, I'm most of Denerim's populace fled/evacuated before the darkspawn army reached it. Why would civilians hang around? And, the armies were fighting darkspawn. "it would have been delightful to come across an arl using his own soldiers as meatshields and baits as he tries to get away." I agree that this what if would have been a nice addition. "they should have had genlocks riding on giant spiders." And, they'd simply be accused of ripping off x like everything else in the game. I think the variety of darkspawn was solid. Genlocks, hurlocks, ogres, shriekers, emessaries (and other various spellcasters), tainted wolves, tainted spiders, broodmother, archdmeon are all avrieties of darkspawn. Not bad. Sure, nobody including me would likely complain about more variety. But, *shrug* It should be pointed out everyone of these darkspawn types actually have a point to them in the lore and in the game. Genlocks, hurlocks, ogres, and shriekers particuarly don't pop out of thin air. "general I would agree Bio's marketing has been farcical and setting a poor precedent for the industry (and continuing the poor precedent of Oblivion). However, on the particular issue of 'deception'... " Disagreed. The amrketing for DA was absolutely spot on. It delievred exactly what was promised. Whether that was good enough is up to the individual. Plus, some people have their own perceptions so when BIO stats x, someone hears y or BIo states x in year 2, and someone holds it up as being hardcoded truth in year 6. Which is sad since things change. The whole 'low magic' or 'dark thing' is nothing but hype and useless monikers because it means NOTHING since everyone's perception of what is 'low magic' or 'dark' are wholly different. ie. Harliquin believes wholeheartedly that DA is low magic which I simply find laughable. A agme where basiclaly every store sells magic items, where magic plays a huge role, where finding magic items occurs every 2-3 battles, and what not. In fact, people complain that out of 10 DA companions, you 'only' get 2 mages as potentials. To me, that's too high magic. They should give you 25 compnaions, and have only 3-4 potential mages (4 counting the PC of course) as they would show how low magic it is. But, that would never happen because players would riot. I'm thinking that people like Harlequin would loathe to play in my version of a 'low magic world'.

She did a lot for you too.

"I got her approval to 100 this time by leaving her at camp the entire game and showering her with jewelry. First playthrough I always did the noble thing and her approval was +9 in the end." I played a good character, always had her in my party, always made the 'good'/ 'nice' choice, and I ended up with her in love with me, and pretty much maxed approval. Like I said, there are at least two 'nice' things when wondering if you should spare certain npcs will she'll push you not to kill them. That's pretty nice.

DIE GIANTS DIE!

You are fighting a deepsawn horde. You relaly think you should be fighting just 5 of them? The logic does not make sense. "Now I'm going to try a mage, because frankly I'm sick of Morrigan and would love to go somewhere without her complaining and losing approval every time I help someone else with a quest" This isn't true. In fact, in multiple situations, she suggests you do the 'nice' thing. " Besides, after the little surprise at the end, I really don't want to look at her again. There are some things I did NOT want to see... my poor, poor Alistair." Well.. you could have turned her down... It's not like she forces you.

Purkake is right. Dollhouse, in fact, has the record for lowest rated series to be renewed for a 2nd one. And, it wans't like DH wasn't advertised as it was. The audience simply wasn't there, and I say that being a fan of the show. Fox, really had little choice to canceling it.

"Wasn't BioWare's claims of a low magic universe from a long time ago. It seems more to me that, over the course of it's 7+ years of development, aspects of it changed. It'd be absurd to hold the game to claims from that early in the development since a game that takes 7 years undoubtedly takes that long because there are speed bumps along the way." Absolutely. But, some people don't get that. If someone says something, in their patehtic mind,s it is 100% locked no ability to change or adapt. I think ideally BIO probably wanted a legit low magic game; but quite frankly in a video game RPG dealing with stuff that DA does, and the avriety of quests and what not, it is irrefutably gonna be high magic. Unless you nerf the magic so bad it no longer is magic. "people who argued that fallout weapon skills should be balanced in spite of real world disparities is now arguing for imbalanced classes. with magic you not even have to fight 'gainst player notions o' reasonableness." Like who? Not me, certainly, as I barely gave a crap that Mr. Sawyer was planning to change stuff for the proposed IPLY FO3. So, who you talkin' about wussy? Don't be cowardly, and name names with evidence to back it up. "agreed. dragon age is a Game. there can be no legit story reasons for making classes imbalanced when the developers has complete control of the game universe, and am at a loss to come up with a gameplay rationale for creating obvious class imbalances." Mages have weaknesses in DA. They lack hit points so against tough physical opponent, it takes 2-3 hits to kill you. If an opposing mage gets a major spell off on you, you are likely dead. If you happened to get paralyzed, there is a very good chance you won't be alive when it wears off. Opponents who get an overwhelm on you means the mage is likely dead while a high level warrior cna likely survive the attack (albeit missing lots of hit points). You throw a powerful aoe spell like fireball, mass paralysis, etc., you better hope the enmies die quick, as once they recovering half of them are coming for you no matter how much your tanks tries to taunt them. In fact, that's how I beat a revenant with my mage. He chased me all over the place, and ignored the taunting warriors. But, if a revenant decided to force pull a mage to him, you are 90% likely dead. Also, it should be pointed out, that non mage talents like scattershot (or whatever tha aoe arrow talent is that stuns/does major damage are) are just as dangerous as 99% of spells. Just look at all the cfrying about bandit attacks people get. The balance of the game is fine for the most part as it is barring a few twinks (like any RPG ever created). It seems to me people whining about DA's 'lack of balance' are conviently ignorinjg all thsoe games they praised have much worse issues then DA. Can anyone with a striaght face that a BG2 thief was the equal of a mage? I sure hope not as that would be absolutely laughable. Also, people make the huge mistake of thinking balanced = equal. It's not. Nor, should it be. Period. P.S. As a game, you can very well use story to focus on whatever you want. Espicially since BIO games are as heavily focused on story as it is on combat. And, the mage lore is awesome. Mages are not overpowered. Rogues are not underpowered. They are balanced pretty darn good. They are, THANKFULLY, not equal. Good thing, however, that DA is a party based game, so the key is to take advantage of all the different talents the different classes have to offer. That's what a party is about. Even Grom admits rogues are useful. Others in these threads, have also pointed out how awesome THEIR rogues are. So, what really is the problem other than so called '**** envy'? Case closed. ADDENUM: "As for your comment, your opinion of 'low magic' is just that. Your opinion not fact. I love how you are trying to walk a very thin line of being 'right' and yet not saying bioware is wrong since both are contrary to one another. As I said before you are entertaining in the text gymnastics you try to pull off. Fail at, but hey, A for effort fruity" The problem here is you assume I agree with BIo 100% of the time which we both know we don't. It's hilarious that when I disagree with BIO you instantly have to disagree with me, anyways. Seriosuly, if I thought DA sucked, you probably would claim it as 'best game ever'. I say inventory is too generous so you say it is too tight. I say mana/health regen is lame. You claim it is awesome. *shrug*

"Then bioware lied as they said it was. *shrugs* So which is it?" What a tool. This should be obvious. Their defintion of 'low magic world' is different than mine. And, sicnce you believe DA is a low magic world, so is yours. *double shrug*

"They did it that way to make it a low magic world." R00fles! DA is NOT a low magic world.

Yeha, should have been able to heal/steal that dalish 'horse' (whatever it is called) or one of the dwarven beasts of burden to ride. That be fun. Maybe griffons will make a comeback in DA2.

Sure, you can. I never had to leave ph@t lewt behind.

Why so butthurt over rogues and inventory? Why not whine about issues that actually matter like lame health/mana regen?