Shadowstrider

I'd hit it.

Ya caught me.

Mos def.

Yeah, we have Guitar Hero here, as well, but no one has played it in a few weeks. We have too much pizza. We do have little contests and such, plus we get pie and burger king crowns if we do something right for a change.

Newsflash: If you have a community, and they decide as a community that they should do X, that is a democracy, not an anarchy.

@astr0creep 1) QA work does begin at the beginning of a project's development. You just don't see it if you're not a project lead. 2) It wouldn't be called a deadline if it was meant to be flexible. @Shadowpaladin Writing a "deep" story that allows freedom and development isn't difficult. Implementing it is also surprisingly easy. If I can do it in modules using NWN, I'm sure a professional development house can manage. The problem here isn't that it is out of reach, it is that the focus is not on this. Most of the focus nowadays is on "cool" features that enhance gameplay, or "cool" game mechanics. The major problem with it is the problems that arise in bug testing and fixing, and the art assets required.

I feel violated! Damn Frappr! stalkers... 350,- over here... but witout additional stuff... (MSI NX7800GT VT2D 256MB PCI-E) Or 560,-, altough I fail to see the difference between the 2 except a X (MSI NX7800GTX VT2D 256MB PCI-E (B)) So, is that a special Bethesda-deal... or do you really have a cheap hardware seller over there that should go international ? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> http://newegg.com They had a deal on an eVGA 7800 256mbit card that you get a free mobo. I needed a PCI-E mobo, anyway. So I got the package and a CLAWHAMMER AMD Athlon processor. Not top-of-the-line stuff, but it can run most games on top specs with no little noticeable slowdown. Anyway, back to the card at hand. Haven't played with it yet, but my response to any new card is "don't believe the hype." Until anandtech.com and a slew of other sites release their reviews, and enough user reviews from people who have actually used the card post theirs. Plus, you're a sucker if you buy a new card when it comes out.

Wait till Nvidia answered on this card... or miss a very good pricedrop (and thus waste alot of your cash) Golden Rule of PC-gaming; Never buy the latest graphical card, nor give up to anything like SLI... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> My 7800 cost around $300, but came with a free $129 mobo, so I got a hell of a deal. As for SLI, that has to be enabled in the game you're playing in order to take advantage of it. Crossfire supposedly does not.

Don't believe the hype.

You do not need to have one or the other. It is entirely possible to have both character freedom and character development within a "deep" story. Simply because something has not been done does not mean it is impossible. Unfortunately, when you're working on a tight schedule, if you add something you must take something away. Editted Clarification: I am not saying that this has not been done, rather I was using the statement to make a point. A game can have both of these things wrapped neatly up in a pretty package. The problem is that it could be buggy, and could lead to development problems.

Look at definition #1 of what you posted; 1 a state of disorder due to absence or non-recognition of government or other controlling systems. http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=anarchism Anarchy boils down to "no form of central power" which inherently leads to chaos and mob rule. Revolutions need leaders. Anarchy does not and can not work.

If it is anything like here, with a thread of random, funny movies and things found on the internet. Also probably a "strange screenshots" thread with a slew of goodies. A little bit of the zombie thing, too.

lawl lawl Zing zing. Who'da thunk it? A political thread where we take pot-shots at the US Gov't. U r so smrt.

Irrelevent. Anarchy does not work because those with guns/weapons/bigger balls take control and become the central government. If the USA were to suddenly say "okay we're done here, no more government" within a few days/weeks organized crime would rule the roost. Edit: Anarchy Chaos Sounds a lot like chaos to me.

SPAM is a violation of forum rules and moderators should start warning people for it when it is purposefully used to close a thread.

He did, or a moderator editted the poll.

Sometimes.

Development houses tend to have QA divisions, or at the very least have artists, designers and execs. testing games as they go.

Well, for one, if you played the Tomb Raider series the writing I'd check your priorities. K. Yes. No, I'm not. You're not very good at thinly veiled insults. This is possibly among the least mature replies, ever. For someone who likes reading, and has an irritating fondness for pretentiousness (in both latin and english forms), you don't seem to comprehend posts. Where, ANYWHERE, did I state, imply or even hint at graphics being MORE IMPORTANT than writing? I'm saying graphics are important. They are. Writing is important, too, probably more important in the planning and even pre-production stages. However, once the game is in full production, the visual and technical aspects of the game take center stage. If a game still needs a ton of writing when the developers should be implementing, something is wrong. Denial isn't a river in Egypt, but you seem to be bathing in it. You can say it a dozen times, it has nothing to do with writing vs. graphics. It is about gameplay, gameplay systems sound "really cool" when written down. The implementation (Gameplay) is what will be the deciding factor in whether it is boring or not. Some of the best ideas turn out to be utterly boring when you actually play. Seems to me you are saying exactly that. *snip* Once again, your reading comprehension seems to be exceedingly low. Physics and traps were an example. You're more interested in arguing semantics, than the core of the issue, though. So nice attempt at a dodge. Players demand visual representation of their actions, thus a visual representation is necessary. Traps and physics was an example, I said that traps and physics are not mandatory. Next? This might be one of the dumbest replies I have ever seen. I'm not sure why I even bothered to reply, other than the fact that you seem to think you have convincing arguements that graphics aren't important to games. A fact that is ludicrous. Basically, you're saying choose-your-own-adventure or MUD games are the pinnacles of game design. An idea that is laughable at best. Thank god you do not work in game development. P.S. Please get better at insults.

LAWL. No. You assume this, and you're wrong. Most of my day is spent writing.

It depends on the game, but VO budgets are generally small, yes. To quote the old addage; no ****, Sherlock. Did you post this to distract? I really don't see any purpose to it. I'm fairly sure everyone knows this. This is not true. At all. In any way, shape or form. Players want, no, demand a visual confirmation to their actions in modern games. They also demand textual and auditory confirmation. If there is none, they feel cheated, additionally there is no more efficient way to express something visual than with a visual trigger. If I score a hit against a guy's leg, he should react to with all three of the aforementioned means. There is also the matter of physics and traps. There is nothing more satisfying than triggering a trap, especially one set by your enemies, to defeat your enemies. Without graphics you could not do this properly, because you would have to be updated every second to be aware of where your enemies where in relation to the trap. It is inefficient and insane. Graphics matter more than you think, to say the least. Editted addendum: Good writing isn't the meat and potatoes. Writing is the base, without it a soup will suck. Graphics and sound are the meat and potatoes, they are the selling point of the soup, they are more marketable than the base, but without the base, you just have meat and potatoes not a soup.

Industry standard graphics, FX, voice acting, FMV, etc. are all part of what most players would consider quality. See: Blizzard. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> you're just saying the same thing over and over again. There is more to a game than flashy graphics, otherwise Flash would be the ultimate modding tool. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, he also mentioned voice acting. You might laugh, or shrug it off, but voice acting is very important to quite a lot of people. Why? People don't like reading when they can just listen to a speaker. Laugh if you want, but focus group after focus group has reinforced this. One of the most poignant and eloquent criticisms I've ever heard about games basically boiled down to "I don't want to read." One of the lines that most struck with me was "I play WoW, but I don't know the first thing about the world or setting." I asked him why, to which he replied "I just haven't read any of the texts or anything, I go to the guy with the exlamation point over his head and pick up my next mission." I asked why he hadn't read, if he was just generally disinterested or found the writing bad. His reply actually astonished me, I'd never thought that "I just don't want to read" would have come from this person. He'd written several page documents, and was studying english as his major. This idea isn't held by just him, either. Tons of people have had similar opinions, and it is sort of a testament to WoW that it is succcessful despite people being disinterested in the actual story of the game... something I don't understand. It is almost a foreign concept to me, playing a game that you have no interest in the story. The most important feature in a game is fun. If a game is fun people will play. There isn't necessarily a specific set of criteria for fun, something that people tend to forget. People get wrapped up in genre title, and what is or isn't an RPG, or action game. I've said it before, I'll say it again; People should like or dislike games based on what they are, not what they are not. There is more to a good game than flashy graphics, yes, but there is more to it than good writing, or intuitive controls, too. It is the combination of all features, that makes or breaks a game. If a game isn't fun people won't like a game, no matter how good the writing is or the graphics are. This, I think, is why people want bigger and better graphics or voice-overs; they're the most obvious part of a game. They are right there in front of you, and you can asses it for exactly what it is, unlike a game's backend systems.

I think the matter is that people are looking for a point where there is none. Its like in that Monty Python sketch about scottish poet Robert Burns where he rides past a sheep and it explodes. Its just a sheep that explodes, thats it. No point. The fun lies in the absurdity of a sheep just exploding for no reason. And its hillarious <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It is funnier than the president feeding sausage to a chimp, yet still not all that funny. Secondly, a sheep exploding is completely out of the blue, unless it somehow relates to said poet. Exploding sheep in sketches about a poet = Random and kind of funny (though not really). Your picture seems to insinuate that the president is stupid, has a lot of free time, and is keeps busy by feeding monkeys. Mocking the president = done to death. Monkey being fed sausage by President Bush = Doesn't seem random and isn't funny.

Logic is lost here, sadly.