Orchomene

Every DD seller has such low prices, so that's not really a valid reason. Most of the games I have on gamersgate were bought with between 70 and 80% price reduction. I only buy on steam when there is no way I can buy on gamersgate, but I'm not specially agains Steam. I just find that there is more freedom on gamersgate.

And non controllable update...

Do we really need a kickstarter project for yet another arpg when arpg are already more than 90% of the crpg market ?

Interesting thought. Never really thought of it that way before, but it is rather spot on. We are after all talking about "unessential" stuff, like entertainment and not a new malaria vaccine. Patronage was, back then, a single wealthy individual/family giving money to an artist so they could get stuff (and probably political/superiority points vis a vis other nobles or wealthy bourgeoisie). In fact, the big publisher model is a lot closer to it than kickstarter is. In the appearance, yes. But not in the essence. Capitalist investment is blind to the product itself, it's targeted toward a monetary return of investment. Of course, one can imagine publishers that are passionate in the object of their business, but it's not in the essence of this economic mechanism. Wheras Kickstarter is a form of mass patronage (like fundations) where the investor expects something different in return, be it an entertainment form, a social recognition or a the sentiment to help society (for medicine fundations, caritative) or being part of something bigger.

Patronage is neither capitalist or socialist. It's an antique system that proved to be very efficient for artistic creation.

It's a democratic form of patronage. It's an interesting step into a more socially involved business model. Edit : When I say social, I'm talking about the literal sense, not about "social networks".

Patch 1.05 for CK2 is out. The chnge log is pretty impressive : http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?601466-PATCH-RELEASED-%28v1.05%29-Checksum-NPPS

Ma I think there was an MMO made around 2002? Maybe. I'm not into MMO, so I really don't know.

Not in the plans at the moment, but I'll keep it in mind. It's supposed to be very nice there in early August It's supposed to be, but sometimes you have some surprises. I had a better weather at Nice.

The Black Moon Chronicles. It's logical, the comics come from a DnD PnP campaign, after all. Edit : the drawer has then done graphic designs for Homm5, but the comic books were before.

Just 30 minutes to go and : $2,921,320 + $105,357

I've also been playing Legend of Grimrock up to level 6. There I met an ogre that killed my party in two seconds. I think I won't come back to the game again. At the begining, it was fun. Combat was manageable and puzzles weren't too tedious. Then it became worse and worse. This might not be the kind of games I enjoy now. As a teenager, I enjoyed challenges. Now, I'm rather into having some entertainment after a day of work, not some frustration.

I'd like a mix between the strong naration of Vampire Bloodlines and the timescale of Vampire Redemption. I would love a vampire game that have different chapters in different eras (middle age, renaissance, revolutions age, modern age, ...)

I've just finished Anachronox. It was pretty good and I enjoyed it a lot even if I am not at all into jRPG. Companions are original, the story is fun and interesting, the combat is not the best point, but the game avoids to send waves of enemies. And there is some good humor too.

I've played Yesterday. I would say it's a pretty good point and click adventure game. Pendulo has done a good job of story telling with an original story. It's better than their last game.

I think many Paradox games contain a good amount of historical information the open the mind about history events in countries far from your own culture. Other than that, very few games. More in P&P RPGs with friends when we have to prepare geographical or historical details in the setting of a campaign (when the game is on our world).

I'm playing Anachronox. It seems good for the moment. The combat is more or less like in Septerra Core, but there are a lot of less fights, which is a relief. The world design is very well thought. I can't judge the story at the moment, being only about five hours into the game.

Isn't Pokemon originally a manga series ?

I've personally campaigned for everyone I know to buy Battlefield 2142, but some of my friends are not that good at competitive FPSs and the fact that they'll die every 3 seconds for the first few hours until they learn how to duck, is usually a detergent for them. Good suggestion though.. It seems coop has taken a back burner since MP became the new thing.. There are games that have it, but it's almost always only 2-4 players, which stinks 'cause we are 6 friends who like to play together and 4 of them don't like huge MP games. Well except strategy games of course, like StarCraft.. hmm.. Most Paradox games are multiplayer, I think.

I think the count of Vermandois is in direct line a descendant by men of Charlemagne (Carolus Magnus). You can check this by looking at his father and so on. The dynasty name changes, but the line is direct.

Still playing Crusader Kings II with the 'de Savoy' dynasty. I've created the Bourgogne (Burgondy) kingdom, then Italy. Then, well, it's becoming a very large empire with my emperor Antoine : emperor of the HRE, king of Bourgogne, Italy, Sicily, Croatia, Norway, Germany and Jerusalem. Next target is inheriting both kingdoms of France and England. Though I just have a century remaining and there are still a lot of things to do.

I've not played ME3 and probably won't, but I don't understand people saying that the last five minutes of the game ruined all the experience for them. A game is just in the fun you have to play it and not just the end. Bioware shouldn't have to modify its creation just because the fans don't like the end. It's not a big deal to have an end that is not what some people are expecting. All in all, the majority of the gamers don't even play up to the end, so...

I'm in for 65 bucks.

I think that court managemet in CK II is a lot easier than in the first opus. Other than that part (which was really in need of improvements), the slower infidels conquests is good to avoid powerful vassals to grow uncontrollable. As said before, with just some tweaks here and there, this game has the potential to better and more balanced than CKDV.

After having tested the game, I chose to change. Replaying now with the Komnenos dynasty. Of course, the objective is to become emperor of the byzantian empire. But it's hard at the moment. I think they made the byzantian empire to cohesive for the period. So, after having married a daughter of the emperor (to get a cb), I took my independency (hardest war I fought at the moment) and began to grab parts of my future Jerusalem kingdom. It seems easiest than grabing the emperor title the way I thought doing. I may next time try ploting, it seems this mechanism can help weakening your liege.