GhostofAnakin

I don't know why, but I'm finding Deus Ex: Human Revolution more fun this time around than I did when I first played it.

Has any Obsidian title sold 2 million units?

I came across one of the creepiest glitches I've encountered in a game. In China, there's that one prostitute that you get missions from. Well, one time I returned to her room to find nothing but her torso sitting on the floor. No head, no arms, no legs, just a torso. And it spoke to me.

What an incredibly disappointing E3 this has been for me.

Made it to China in DX:HR.

Watchdogs looks like the only game that's intriguing to me. The other either don't appeal to me, or they're PS3 exclusive (which I don't own).

One of the clips of the Star Wars: 1313 demo, one of the guys who worked on the game indicated that the demo was from the PC version.

I want to see a lot more of the story and/or gameplay elements before I decide. The Force Unleashed also looked good when only specific action clips were shown, but it ended up disappointing me. At the very least, the stuff in the video does indeed look cool.

So I take it Day 1 is when they announce the crappy stuff no one really cares about?

I still hate the fact they're bringing back Master Chief for Halo 4. Some people just can't let go.

Replaying Deus Ex: Human Revolution again.

Seriously, it's getting a bit too much now. Are gamers really that lazy nowadays that they can't even be bothered to use a controller anymore? Anyway ... I guess there hasn't been any surprise revelations, in terms of games, yet?

Thoughts? I gave my mini-review on a previous page.

I wish I knew even a fraction about the source material for Cyberpunk 2020 so I could come up with witty "inside joke" comments of my own.

Best game I've played since Bloodlines I think. It's just engaging though levels are sloppy and the game is buggy to hell, the gunplay grows on you and the writing is as good as it gets. Are you playing it on the PC? Because I honestly haven't run into any noticeable bugs in pretty much every play through of mine.

My last replay that I just finished, playing as a Recruit, I decided to max out pistol, assault rifle, and sabotage. It seems to be an effective build for both stealth and run-and-gun. My pistol (with silencer) allowed for a lot of quiet kills, but my assault rifle ability also allowed me to exchange long range fire the times I was caught sneaking around. And sabotage let me hack into any computer, pick any lock, and disable any security system with ease. I might try a stealth build next, but I'm not big on sneaking around. I'll do it for the most part, but if there's a room full of enemies and it looks like it'll be very difficult to sneak past, I just open fire.

Just finished a Recruit play through of Alpha Protocol. Playing through again reminded me of what a little gem that game was. It's a shame it did so poorly in reviews, and we're unlikely to see a sequel for it.

I wonder how far along in the development cycle this game is. I'm guessing there's not going to be anything about it at E3?

Every time I see a Hitman game (or any game that requires stealth), I get excited and end up buying it, but then quickly get frustrated because I suck at stealth, and often times the majority of the game requires missions to be tackled that way or you fail.

Maybe it's due to your build. Aren't there some defensive builds that are less efficient on one on one fights but better against groups ? Edit : All in all, I'm more interested on how you find the storytelling than the combat. I never really like combats in games. That quite possibly could be the case. You get to choose from three different classes to play for each of the two characters (Alester and Mors). In any case, it's frustrating that I can cake walk through the supposed big boss fights, but then get my ass handed to me against lesser enemies just because they're in greater numbers. The story itself is pretty good. If anything, it's the main strength of the game and the only thing that kept me playing. There are some interesting twists and turns along the way, plus if you've read the books, it gives some good references to events that take place in the first book. I didn't much like the combat (it's very KOTOR-ish, but IMO, a bit more of a chore because certain special attacks require a ridiculous amount of energy), and the quests weren't really plentiful. Though they were pretty good, story-wise. There's also a lot of trekking about cities that seem rather dead, since you can't talk to or interact with the majority of the townsfolk you pass by. So it's basically like walking around an empty map to get from Point A to Point B. Also with regards to the story, it feels like you're just along for the ride. A lot of times even when you "win" the combat fight, a cutscene plays that shows you losing whatever objective you were going for in order to push their story forward.

Also, I'm finding the combat design is kind of silly. One on one (or even two on one), there isn't a single enemy I find challenging. Even the "boss fights" are a piece of cake. It seems the designers decided that the only challenging combat is when they put your one or two characters up against a group of 8 or so enemies, a few of which have bows/crossbows that they just keep at you with from across the room. I really hate when games are designed like that. Combat shouldn't only be difficult because you're up against a hundred soldiers who are, on their own, quite easy to kill, but the sheer numbers of them and the fact they're constantly shooting at you/hitting you while you have to go through killing each and every one. I shouldn't have more problems defeating a horde of "redshirts" than I do defeating the big, bad boss man. The fight I gave up on is a perfect example of this. All through the game one bad guy has been hyped up and made to be so uber-awesome. But finally, after 30 hours of tracking him down, I mowed through him in no time, barely losing any health along the way. Yet immediately after that climactic encounter, I'm faced with taking on a group of about 8 guards, 4 of which have long range weapons. So I keep getting killed because of the sheer numbers I'm facing, even though individually it takes way less damage to kill them than the boss fight.

Maybe a deliberate design choice, with consequences to happen if you do take the time out to do them? Or by doing them it will alter the main quest in some way? I kind of doubt it, but you never know.... Possibly. We'll see. I've finished up both those sidequests and moved onto the main quest. So far, the main quest doesn't seem to be affected by me delaying it and going on a little side excursion instead.

Not sure how I feel about this DLC/expansion. Skyrim felt like a one-and-done game to me, and since I've finished it, I don't know if I'm going to bother playing it again. This Dawnguard is going to have to be massive and add a tonne of stuff to do for me to get it.

I'm coming near the end of Game of Thrones, I think. The level design is a little weird, in regards to quests. For instance, I'm at a point where time is of the essence. We *must* make it to King's Landing right away! But suddenly I've been given two sidequests that take me all the way to the Wall. These sidequests weren't available to me at an earlier time, when the story didn't necessarily place an importance on me arriving at a location in a prompt manner. I know all RPGs tend to have this happen, where it kind of seems odd that the PC takes time out from a crucial mission to go fetch something. But in this case, the oddity is in the fact that there were multiple times before when I had a bit of ... "downtime" ... to go trotting around, but they (the developers) waited until time was of the essence before giving me these sidequests.

So for those who are familiar with the rulebook, what are the more popular classes that players can select from? Which ones are most likely to be included in the game, assuming they go with a limited number of classes rather than allowing every single one that's available in the PnP game?