Humanoid

I'm not thinking pie-in-the-sky options that aren't there and would need to be implemented, I'm talking options that already exist in the codebase but are hidden from view because of the value in the internal variable. So out of that hypothetical dozen or so choices, the system is selecting a handful it deems most in-character for a given savegame and presents those only. I can understand the information overload angle, and while I'm personally fine with leaving all the options visible, I'm happy to accept that some may view it as confusing. I also admit I haven't really fully taken in the full text of the first few posts -it's generally a case of me sitting up in bed at 8 in the morning to start my day and check out the new posts, as the timezones thing mean the vast majority of posts on this forum are made while I'm asleep. So really the main thing I've been trying to address are the big multiple choice examples in the first post. From an imaginary me-as-a-game-designer perspective, I don't see the value of designing and coding a system which is designed to expose X out of Y number possible options when presenting all Y is, at the worst case scenario, adding a bunch of text that the player can just skim over. I realise I probably have latched onto one particular aspect of this whole proposal without looking at the bigger picture in depth, which I don't really have much to add to. Happy to leave it at that for now.

It's still having the computer guess at the character's personality traits - "He'll enjoy dialogue that conforms to his style of play" - you'd have the game stop you from sneering, from being condescending, from being infuriatingly obtuse? Is your character choosing those "insane" dialogue options because he is insane, or because he's feigning it? My position is that evaluating a choice should be made in the context of whether it fits in the scope of the game world, rather than what the alignment system guesses your character to be. You can't make neon pink elvish armour in Fallout because you can't make any armour at all. In a game allowed you to craft and dye any armour you wanted, and one in which elves exist, then I'm not seeing a reason not to allow that choice, even if you've been roleplaying a Johnny Cash doppelganger.

Presenting my view simplistically: alignment system bad; reputation system good. I feel what an alignment system tries to do is frame a character's mindset, and restrict your options based on some preconceived notion of what a 'good' or 'evil' act is - and we've seen some pretty counterintuitive examples of each in a lot of games. Personally I feel that the player-character's state of mind really has no business being quantified: let it stay in the player's mind. There's no point in the game trying to guess whether your character is feeling vindictive, mischievous, elated, angry, or depressed - the player can take the input, being whatever the character has recently been faced with, and come up with an in-character response. I don't see the value of filtering those possible responses based on some internal metric - it's a lot of effort designing such a system with little-to-no payoff. The player has a brain, they can filter better than any computerised tally can. Reputation on the other hand affects how the game world reacts to the player and can be much more interesting. If you've spent the game channeling Charles Bronson blowing everyone away, that bad guy you've been trying to catch would sensibly be more likely to fight to the death when cornered, whereas if you have previously shown a merciful streak, they may attempt to surrender and submit to your interrogation. The key difference I see here as compared to the alignment system is that the player can still take any action the character is physically able to which is far less of a straitjacket, but still provide payoff for the manner in which you've been behaving. A simple example would go like this. Under an alignment system, if you've been behaving "evilly," your character doesn't get an option to save a kitten from a tree. That's it, can't even try. There's no conceivable reason in the world your character would ever do such an action ....really, who's playing the character? You, or the writer? (It really isn't hard to justify - after all, evil masterminds tend to have a genuine liking of cats :D) Under a reputation system, there's nothing stopping you from rescuing the kitty. Except, oh, you've been known in the neighbourhood for being a mean bastard with a history of cruelty to animals. You try to rescue the kitten for whatever motivation you have (game doesn't need to know), but the little girl who owns the critter screams at you to get away and leave them alone. Just like that, instead of narrowing your RP options, you now have an interesting new situation to handle.

Don't care about the game, but sad that JvC has been reduced to this.

Will be interesting to see whether you actually start out as a member of the clergy/chantry thing from the beginning or whether you get railroaded into it like DAO railroaded you into the wardens. That one thing was the single most offensive thing in the game for me, so any improvement there would be a small glimmer of hope. Having you be, say, raised from childhood as a member of a fanatical church then having the option to go on a righteous quest to purge the infidels or to go rogue would be far more interesting than being a warrior/thief/mage that's for whatever reason forced to fight for the church because the plot demands it. Unfortunately that thing that looks like a press blurb sounds like the latter scenario is the likely one. Ah well.

The comments about Wilson sound so like the comments about Casey Hudson that I could easily mistake myself for being in the ME3 thread.

AMD to bundle Sleeping Dogs with HD78xx series cards, and I assume there's a good chance of it applying to the 79xx cards too. Presumably a response to nVidia just announcing they're bundling Borderlands 2 with their current generation cards. While personally I'd prefer lower prices instead of bundling games I have no interest in, at least both GPU vendors are now moving towards more current games with broader appeal (as opposed to say, the previous headline bundled title, DiRT). Hopefully not just a once-off. This leads to an interesting hardware recommendation for those with a video card budget of ~$250-300USD. Which card to buy depends on which bundled title you prefer. As for DA3. I'm too lazy to even make the Inquisition joke no one expected.

Doesn't sound good. Can you still hear it spin up normally and such? It *probably* isn't a head crash which means the data is technically still 100% recoverable if it's critical stuff - my guess is that the electronics failed - but will likely cost you hundreds of pounds to pay a data recovery specialist to get it out. In the past it was (relatively) easier to swap out the PCB in the event of a failure like this, but I don't believe this is a practical end-user solution with more recent drives - no personal experience with it though. Not saying that you can't buy a replacement PCB for your specific drive, but it'd be a lot more complicated than just ordering it in and plugging it in. Do physically inspect it though, often you can see when one of the chips or whatever has blown. In terms of things you can try, there aren't many: you could try swapping the cables/ports that it connects to in case it's a problem with either of those, or try it in another PC, but I'd not be terribly optimistic. P.S. Looking for replacement PCBs on Google brings up stuff like this - http://www.onepcbsolution.com/index.html

I have no personal experience either really, I buy my movies on disc (generally from the UK and US) and rip them myself. At 30-50GB a pop for a typical blu-ray, it's pretty space intensive, filled up about 12TB thus far.

That's what you *have* to do to play "properly" last I knew - just like ME2's (can't recall the others) system where if you don't go to either extreme, you don't get the optimal rewards. In this case it was that you can't use certain gear unless you've maxed out the alignment bar. It's not a hindrance for someone just playing the 1-50 story I guess, but I imagine for someone planning to do the endgame content, it basically forces them to blindly pick either the top option all the time, or the bottom option all the time. Making each decision on its merits as I did, by level 40 I was basically flip-flopping between the neutral zone and "Dark I" which meant I couldn't use any alignment gear at all.

There's no Netflix or equivalent in Australia, so it's assumed the movie files will be regular non-streaming 1080p video. Even if there was, the general speed of Internet connections here would preclude its use anyway. And for good sound on a (relative) budget, I'd recommend at least a pair of active bookshelf speakers such as these Audioengine A5+, I personally use the regular version (no remote control) as my PC speakers.

Us Americans need something in our favor, what with our distinct lack of top hats and "cheerio." But when I see the words "top hat" the first thing I think of is Abe Lincoln.

As a scoundrel, all I remember was being steamrollered by elites whether at level 1 or at level 40, so I can't say the difficulty changed any. If I changed from my tank companion, elites were flat out unbeatable - and yes, I tried both the burst damage ASAP and the spam heal companion (with zero points in any healing skills) methods. Was neither overlevelled or underlevelled for the most part, though probably undergeared as my WoW mentality told me to ignore wasting time with gear management until the level cap. Went double for companion gear - the only gear they got was when all the rewards for a given quest were restricted to companion use only. I think beating the guy to get my ship back at level 15 took 15+ tries.... EDIT: Only after reading the above discussion on the cinematics do I realise: the guy on the box cover is the guy who dies in the intro? Huh?

I take back all the crap I said about ME3's ending, and bestow it all upon ME3's beginning. I've had a gutful of the emotional sledgehammer, the contrived melodrama, the senseless cheerleading for Earth. The idiotic dream sequence after the first real mission of the game was the straw that broke the camel's back - I'm done with the game, for me my worst game purchase since Oblivion. The marginal improvements in the shooty bits don't compensate for the insulting delivery. Have instead started my second run through New Vegas, and my first with any sort of DLC (disabled all the loot ones though). Hardcore, stealth bomber. Struggling with any sort of difficult combat which doesn't involve me getting the drop on foes with my dynamite however - can't drop my compulsion to raise non-combat skills to make every check I see so aside from explosives I'm pitifully low on any skill that enables murder. Had to skip the Repconn plant quest because of that but no big loss I guess. Also finding that sneak seems much less effective than, for example's sake, Skyrim: it seems that it's balanced around guns range instead of melee range, I've barely been able to get close enough to anyone for a melee/pocket-dynamite sneak attack. I'm talking ~50-60 skill here, not high but I don't expect to have to nearly max out a skill to be able to even start using it. Even with walk toggled, light armor and at most a knife equipped I can't get close enough. As for hardcore mode comments, I imagine I'm mostly echoing previous comments: I like making health recovery more restrictive, i.e. the delayed effects of "potions" and that sleeping is not a panacea; but on the other hand, food and water management is a bit too mechanical for me. Not sure if it'd be better to simplify it or remove it altogether however. No comments on the companion changes or ammo weight since I'm using neither in this run. Finally, with it being discussed here, I'm tossing around the idea of KoTOR2 as my next game in line. I never got past the tutorial first time around, my video card died on me during that attempt and I never returned to it. Vaguely curious, to me at least, is that the dead card was a 7900 series (nVidia), and now I've just bought a 7900 series (AMD), come around full circle, sort of. Anyway I know there's the restoration patch, and am aware of the movie and music patches. I think that's the "complete" installation?

I thought the prevailing opinion was that DA2 would have been better off without its contrived respawning set-piece combat (and the singular tunnel it was set in) anyway. I probably would really play it with combat totally removed actually, the writing couldn't have been any more offensive to me than DAO's was.

Size. Size trumps all. So short of a projector (including rear projection), just find the biggest plasma you can afford and lug it away. And plasma means either Panasonic or Samsung - my personal pick for value would be the 60" ST model for a touch under $2k (and therefore $1k cheaper than the 65"). The only meaningful difference between the mid-range ST and the range-topping VT model is that the VT has a blingier frame. And before anyone says "but that's too big!" - here's a nice recommended viewing distance calculator, not based on rules of thumb or anything like that, but on formal motion picture standards: http://myhometheater...calculator.html - a 60" widescreen panel has a THX recommended viewing distance of 2.04m and a maximum of 2.87m. While this might seem very close to what is a big TV, bear in mind the intended use is for movies and not broadcast television. Don't fall for the LED/LCD scaremongering tactic about plasma being susceptible to burn-in and that kind of rubbish. P.S. The size criterion rule also broadly applies to speakers as well if you're planning on building something more complete - and you should, since while everything else about TVs is constantly improving, the quality of built-in TV speakers is almost at an all-time low. Get a basic AV receiver (can save a packet on mid-range receivers importing from Amazon Germany) and a pair of floorstanders to start (budget $1-2k), worry about stuff like the centre speaker, surrounds, and subwoofer later (floorstanders will delay the need to get a woofer, compared to if you started with a pair of bookcase speakers like I did). EDIT: I know you're conscious about stuff like power usage and general efficiency of electronics, but unfortunately the current situation is very much the reverse of the above advice. LED-backlit LCD is the most power efficient current mainstream technology, followed by CCFL(traditional)-backlit LCD, and then plasma. However, LED-backlit panels tend to have moderate-to-serious problems with uniformity, leading to incorrectly bright areas on the screen, and any LCD will fall a fair way behind in terms of colour reproduction and motion as well. For what it's worth, most LCD panels used in televisions are MVA variants, which are less accurate than IPS panels (but moreso than TN panels) for colour but produce deeper blacks than both IPS and TN. However plasma squashes any LCD for deep crisp blacks. Fortunately, the gap is smaller than it's ever been, and another factor is that plasma has variable power usage depending on the image being displayed (i.e. full white screen will suck up maximum juice, a black screen will sip power), whereas both LCD technologies will show more or less constant power usage.

Steam always downloads games to the Steam directory, which is something I can't believe hasn't been "fixed" yet - even supposedly inferior competitors have more flexibility than that. A common approach to the problem, particularly when dealing with SSDs, is to install Steam onto a spindle drive so that by default games don't hog space on the SSD, and then move certain preferred games to the SSD by manual copying and creation of symlinks. An alternative to accomplish the same thing would be to use a third party tool like Steam Mover which just automates the process (never used it myself though). As to your specific problem of Steam not recognising that it's been moved - search finds this : so it should be working, but check where your desktop shortcut is pointing, and also check that the directory on C: has been properly deleted.

The flashpoints currently have daily rewards associated with them, so most players that are interested in that content will run one each day. So currently subscribers have plenty of players to run with. There is a shortage of tanks, and to a lesser degree healers, but not a shortage of players. Personally, as long as they keep their promise and keep adding more content for the endgame on a regular basis, this won't affect me at all. They have one new raid in the pipeline, and as long as they keep that part of the game from getting stale, I'll probably keep playing. Edit: Cantousent, the current trial is only to level 15. The full F2P will not start until later this fall, not sure when. But if you want an invite for the current trial to get a head start, feel free to PM me with your e-mail address and I'll hook you up. I only benefit from it if someone I invite actually signs up for a subscription, so I don't care about that. Just happy to get people in to the game If the incentive is loaded as being optimal at one flashpoint a day, and the weekly flashpoint cap for F2P players is 7+ a week then I guess it's workable. Wasn't aware TOR was still on the daily system since my equivalent experience in WoW encourages doing them in bulk once a week. I reiterate the concern about the development pace of operations/raids though. Once the F2P model kicks in, there seems precious little incentive for the beancounters to keep developing this type of content when it's only accessible by a relative minority of players - and in terms of actual participation, a minority of a minority. Again though, I'm coming from a WoW angle where even as (I believe) the raid participation rate is greater than that of TOR, but still is released at a pace best described as 'glacial.' P.S. Ah yes, healers. By the time I quit WoW, I had all four healer classes (specs) raid-ready, out of the six total characters I had capable of the current-tier raid at any given point. Only one tank though, my guild oddly had an excess of tanks. EDIT: Raithe - my point is exactly that: there is incentive for people to run as many warzones and flashpoints as they can stomach, but as the proportion of paying subscribers drops, forming viable groups to do that will become harder as the F2P players will either have hit their participation limit for the week, or are rationing their quota to optimise the daily rewards from doing them. "Hey dude, wanna go again?" "Can't, only got one run left this week and I need it to do the daily quest tomorrow."

Yes to all three. I didn't participate in any of the three during my time in TOR so it's not essential content for those who only want to play TOR as a pseudo-KoTOR3 experience, but they would be pretty important in terms of maintaining an active player base.

It's fortunate that my "paper" currency is plastic and therefore washable. On the other hand, I would not even attempt to wash a cat.

Four months after buying it, and after a couple of days Origin-wrangling, finally started ME3. Taking my time through it due to limited time and no great enthusiasm - everything about it plotwise has been spoiled for me a long time ago - but the kindest thing about it I can say is that it's not worse than ME2.

source: http://www.swtor.com/free/features While I agree F2P is the right move, I think some of these restrictions are nonsensical and will hurt both paying and non-paying customers significantly, along with the bottom line - it's as if they're trying to placate people with currently paid-up subscription blocks with exclusivity to certain features while actually hurting them by doing so. Breaking it down - - Limited character creation: As long as all classes and subclasses are available I guess it's not a big deal, but it seems a petty thing to restrict - essentially making some aesthetic choices exclusive. But then I never cease to be surprised at what some people will pay for pure vanity functionality (WoW's infamous sparkle-pony comes to mind) so eh. - Capped warzone/flashpoint participation per week. This is kind of a big deal. I guess the idea is "if you want to play more, cough up," but I expect the net result is that the paid subscribers end up running out of people to play with when first their "freeloader" friends, then the server community at large (remembering the group-finder tool is server-restricted) hit their weekly quotas, leaving this content a wasteland in the day or three before the timer resets. - Capped space mission participation per week: Okay, this one will probably go totally unnoticed. - No operations: I have a hard time seeing a large enough paid population persisting to maintain and develop operations from now on in - wouldn't be surprised if the move completely kills off this style of gameplay. - Restrictions on fast travel: No details that I can see, but this sounds basically like nagware - try to annoy the users enough with tedium until they either relent and pay up, or quit altogether. - Trade network: I basically didn't use this at all during my month of TOR so not sure what the real impact is. Low limit on selling? No selling at all and purchases only? Could be anything. In the end, I think trying to have it both ways like what's proposed there will result in no winners at all. Hopefully some common sense prevails before this muddled up segregation goes live.

I'd be all over a PST "EE" that removed all non-player instigated combat. But I guess the balancing challenge there is finding a way to make the physical stats be worth taking. But regardless, I don't believe in all the stuff said about "tarnishing" a game when debating whether a proposed sequel, whether spiritual or otherwise. I'll always back the side making the attempt, because even the tiniest chance of getting something good out of it is better than zero chance.

Noting that my previous post has little value as general buying advice, I'll add that here instead, separated by what I think are the common circumstances for someone looking at getting a highish-end card. Assumptions are that pricing is roughly in line with the US pricing I had ($320-330 for the 7950; $400 for the GTX670; $420-430 for the HD7970; and $500 for the GTX680) and that the advice in general is applicable when comparing reference vs reference and custom vs custom. Medium resolution, no overclocking The cards broadly perform to their place on the price curve, with the 670 slightly overperforming, making it the best buy in this category especially when added to it running cooler and more efficient. As previously mentioned though, avoid the reference design like the plague, which is easy enough to do given Gigabyte sell their excellent custom design for the same price as other vendor's reference cards. Medium resolution, overclocked Here the respective AMD cards catch up to their nominal tier matches in terms of performance, though at a cost of a fair bit of heat and power (and consequently noise). A ~$70 saving on the purchase price goes a fair way towards closing the gap however. Ultimately your power supply and case cooling may have a good say in which way you go here. High resolution, no overclocking The main difference here compared to the medium resolution case is that the 670 loses its edge over the 7970, both in absolute performance and price-weighted performance. AMD edges this segment unless plans are made to add a second card later. High resolution, overclocked AMD clear win, matching or beating the equivalent nV cards even with a mild overclock let alone a maxed one. Again multi-GPU muddies the issue a little, but given the gap in price and in performance, it's tempting to go CF anyway in this segment.

I did leave off a reminder that I run a comparatively high resolution of 2560x1440. But even ignoring that, the real comparison is as mentioned: willingness to overclock. Given the tight restrictions (no voltage tweaking) on doing so on Kepler, it means that the 7970 at 1100MHz+ is now on average the fastest single GPU, and the 7950 (admittedly at clocks I personally won't run) given the right treatment does the same to the 670 (again, at about 1100MHz). At high resolutions AMD has had the advantage since the start, and now it's a big one. A lot of current perception may say otherwise, but that's based on outdated launch reviews and benches: it's both damning and encouraging, but driver revisions have closed the gap completely since then (recall AMD had massive issues with Battlefield 3 initially). In general, the 79xx series scales better than Kepler with clocks (almost linearly at parts of the curve), which is a complete reversal of the previous 69xx series which barely responded to clock boosts. And the overclocking headroom is massive, the 7950 stock core is at 800MHz, and easily reaches 1000MHz (a 25% boost) without touching the voltage, and at ~1.2V should generally hit about 1150-1200MHz, that's up to a massive 50% increase. The 7970 for what it's worth reaches around the same clocks from a 925MHz base (1050 for the GE editions being rolled out now - but don't bother buying the GE really). Being out here on the other side of the world gives me little knowledge of worldwide pricing, but given the US pricing I've seen - placing the 7970 at barely over 670 pricing, means that for the majority of cases the 7970 is the superior investment. Graphs and numbers below the line representative of my resolution (though not of the games I play), feel free to skip this part as it's admittedly boring. Some graphs to back me up on both the scaling point and the overall performance - first up is the ubiquitous BF3, an nV stronghold until fairly recently. The blue bar is the 7950 at factory settings, the green bar is at 1025MHz. I do believe the AA advantages AMD here, but I always run AA. Going up to 2560x1600 - blue is 925MHz, green is 1050MHz, with the 7950 there at its stock 800MHz: Skyrim, another strong nV title, until recently: ARMA2 Also have a fairly recent comparison between the top custom designs for both the 7970 and the 680 here: http://www.xbitlabs....n-hd7970_6.html Plus some raw numbers: http://www.xbitlabs..../zfulltable.png P.S. For multi-GPU purposes though, yes, I would go with Kepler for the time being. (But personally I don't think I'll ever bother with either vendor's multi-GPU solutions) I like to think I'm pretty vendor neutral, GPU history is HD7950 - HD5850 - 8800GT - X1950XT - 7900GT - 9800Pro - 4200Ti - 500Ti. Heh, that's perfectly symmetrical.