GhostofAnakin

Why are there performance issues on the PS4, but not on the XBox One? Don't they have similar processing power? And in fact, isn't the PS4 slightly more powerful?

More Wasteland 2. I think I severed ties with one of the factions in California without having much choice to avoid it. They were going to execute some boy and although I could enter into a dialogue with the leader of the faction, the only options were basically side with them and offer to kill the boy myself, or fight them. There was no option to save the boy in a peaceful manner (that I got). It's uncanny how much it's like Fallout. I mean, duh, obviously. But it's like they're literally the same game/series, not just "Fallout is a spiritual successor to the original Wasteland".

New trailer for Mass Effect Andromeda is out (not good at the linking thing). Why are BioBoards drooling over it? It showed pretty much nothing. I'll start getting excited when they actually show gameplay or story footage. Hearing Jennifer Hale do a monologue while showing old video footage of various astronauts heading to the moon is hardly drool-worthy.

Eh, I wouldn't go that far. PoE was a solid game. I just don't think it was a "gotta keep playing this for just one more hour" type of game. Whereas I think Wasteland 2 is.

Sacrilegious comment incoming: Wasteland 2 is more fun than Pillars of Eternity. It's drawn me in a lot more than PoE did. But maybe I'm just more a fan of guns than swords and magic.

More Wasteland 2. I think I've mopped up all quests in Arizona. One more big decision to make and that's it.

Only time I actually used a crossbow (other than the "recommended" time with Vesemir) was underwater against those swimming things that try and drag you under.

More Wasteland 2 goodness. Robots are tearing my party apart. Doesn't help that certain NPCs in my party keep going rogue and running right into the middle of a killing zone.

I can respect that but in my terms I found them useless because the damage they didn't didn't warrant hurting companions. So it was a very stituational weapon and I preferred assault rifles for all of my characters. They had range, accuracy, damage and versatility, I didn't have to had the stars align so that I could get a decent to hit percent. This is my issue with the shotguns in WL2. The reward (damage they do) didn't offset the risk (limited range). When you factored in range and amount of shots you could take per turn, my Rangers with assault rifles were much more effective in combat than my shotgun wielder. And he didn't make up for it by being some kind of insta-kill beast when he did hit something -- he didn't do a whole lot more damage than my other non shotgun characters did.

Wasteland 2 still. My shotgun wielding Ranger sucks. The range on his weapon sucks, and he seems to miss unless he's on the "square" right next to his target. I should have made him competent with submachine guns instead. Good thing he's useful at lockpicking and safe cracking, though.

I'm enjoying Wasteland 2, but a lot of the "choices" seem to spring up on you without much chance to do much else. I'm currently in that Canyon of the Titan, where you have to choose between two factions. Problem is, I happened to run across one of the factions and because I needed to reach an area safely, I decided to let one of their dudes join my party. This basically caused me to be against the other faction, even though I didn't quite think I'd have to decide yet.

I hated the constant beeping thing in Dead Money. Then again, I hate any game mechanic that serves to remind me I have to do certain things either within a certain time limit or within a certain parameter.

Incidentally you could make the previous game level 30 your level one by keeping the same enemies and having base skills while subsequently escalating the difficulty. It's been a few months since I last played, so my memory is foggy. But didn't they essential do the above? At the beginning of TW3 you had access to all the signs, they just weren't very strong. So they sort of did avoid making Geralt a true, genuine "level 1" since he already had access to skills that a true level 1 wouldn't have had.

It's the difference between storytelling in books and storytelling with an eye toward gameplay. From a "logical" point of view, Geralt should not start at "level 1" each new game. But from a gameplay point of view, part of the design decision is to allow new players a chance to experience Geralt getting stronger as they play along. Leveling up has always been one of the "cool" features of RPGs. There's something rewarding for the player to see their character improve or get stronger as they progress. So if they made Geralt powerful and have the highest possible skills right at the beginning, already they're denying the gamer that one key feature of RPG gaming -- watching your character progress as you level up. I mean, don't get me wrong. I get where you're coming from. It would be like Luke Skywalker constantly being a "level 1" in each subsequent movies, as though he's forgotten everything he learned at the end of the prior movie. But that's just one of the problems with transferring existing characters into a game setting.

Yes I agree entirely two (almost complete) resets now with no real reasoning behind them. He's got amnesia at the start of Witcher 2 and he's lovesick and not thinking straight in Witcher 3. See? Rational explanations for decrease in skill.

I finally got that damn Topekan/Atchison quest to end peacefully! But now I'm stuck. I have to get to an area I can't reach without going through enemies that are too strong for me, but there doesn't seem to be any other quests available to me in order to gain levels for my party.

Still Wasteland 2. I think I went a little gun crazy on this last quest. But most of it wasn't my fault. One time I just broke some pigs out of a pen, then the next thing I know everyone on the map is shooting at me.

It's not even just how the character looks that's bad, it's the actual animation. She moves around like a clunky robot. It's like what C-3PO would look like if you put human skin over his metal frame.

I wonder if George Martin will ever finish the next book. Wasn't it supposed to be done by the end of 2015? Now I think it's "maybe 2016", which likely means 2017 or later. Love the series, but absolutely hate how much of a procrastinator he is. The thing is, Martin agonizes over every paragraph. He writes, edits, rewrites and re-edits while checking for consistency and with what has been written before. He's not a hack who'll churn out voluminous garbage. I find that type of meticulous attention to craft refreshing in popular fiction (or game development). And he never gave out a release date for Winds of Winter. For all his edits/re-writes, I'm not sure the extra time actually solves anything for him. His past two novels in the series were, IMO, well below the quality of the first three. So taking a decade to write them didn't exactly improve the quality. Whereas the first three, weren't they written within a shorter time frame? Maybe he's better off *not* re-writing constantly, as maybe that results in the quality going down? I think it was the publisher who gave a rough estimate (when asked by fans) of a Christmas 2015 release, which then got pushed back to sometime in 2016. The one thing Martin has stated is he expects to not take as long to write this one and the rest of the series as his previous delays. That's proving to be false.

That's ... pretty horrible, graphics-wise. I mean, it kind of looks like an old version of the Sims, a few years back. Well, of course, it's from console version. I don't think you can blame consoles for those graphics. The Witcher 3, Metal Gear Solid V, Dragon Age Inquisition, etc. are all "consolized" and have much, much better looking graphics than the above.

The problem with these series nowadays that do long story arcs, instead of sticking to weekly stories that end at the end of 1 hour, is if the long story arc is fizzling or doesn't have enough steam to last the entire season. Blindspot is slowly getting to that point; I went from being curious about Jane's past to simply wanting it over with. I also wish these long story arc shows would still manage to have self-contained stories per week. You know, a story that they have to solve, but with hints and scenes that still build on the larger story arc. Instead, some of these episodes don't seem to have anything to do but add more "WTF is happening" to the main story arc. I used to like shows like the Blacklist and Person of Interest, because at first they solved individual cases per episode while adding another bit of story to the overall story arc. But both shows basically ignored the episodic-specific stories in favor of being one long, 13 episode story.

I wonder if George Martin will ever finish the next book. Wasn't it supposed to be done by the end of 2015? Now I think it's "maybe 2016", which likely means 2017 or later. Love the series, but absolutely hate how much of a procrastinator he is.

That's ... pretty horrible, graphics-wise. I mean, it kind of looks like an old version of the Sims, a few years back.

Came across a better melee fighter in Wasteland 2, but my party is full at the moment. I would dismiss my current melee fighter, but he seems to just stand on that map where I dismiss him instead of going back to his actual home village. I don't want to leave him in the middle of nowhere. Also, traveling through the wasteland with all these radiation hotspots is getting a bit tedious when I'm trying to explore areas I haven't been to yet.

Some were good, but a few of the party members were either under developed (Vivienne) or just plain silly (Sera). I also wasn't that big a fan of Iron Bull. Instead of having a Qunari in your party, it felt like you had a Ferelden acting like a Qunari. It would be like instead of having Mr. Spock aboard, you had a guy with Vulcan ears but who basically acted like a human.