WideAndNerdy

Accepted with relief.

But constant recovery and recovery are not related. Recovery refers to the time after an attack before you can start the next attack. It comes into play when looking at weapon and armor choices Which can affect the duration of recovery. Constant Recovery is a special ability that let's your fighter continually replenish endurance during a fight. If a player doesn't know these things when looking at the description of the cloak of the tireless defender, and he clicks on the word Recovery, he's going to think the cloak somehow helps shorten the time between attacks when what it actually does is help the fighter recover endurance points even faster than they already can.

Did I spit in your drink or something? Whats the deal? Recovery is keyword embedded inappropriately in this context. The Cloak of the Tireless defender has nothing to do with the recovery action mechanic. Its misleading.

This is absolutely something they should sort out. Or else none of their keywords can contain parts of other keywords. I assume its script driven but this shouldn't be that hard for them to figure out though I can't blame them for not having it in the launch build. I've certainly worked around bugs like that in development when I didn't think I had time to do a more robust fix. If they don't have the time to actually change the script to handle this sort of thing, all they'd need to do is rename the "Constant Recovery" ability to not contain the word "Recovery". Maybe Constant Rejuvenation?

I think we need a separation between editorials and reviews(subjective) and news(objective), with different standards for both. Obviously disclosure should occur, and there should be some standards implemented to maintain professional distance. It seems strange to me that game journalist cannot implement this, it is so simple to have an acknowldegement before the piece speaking of ones contact with a publisher and developer, along with any ties. It is not an onerous or complicated thing. Then make the review in two sections, one an objective critcism focusing on features, tech and issues etc, and one a subjective review. A simple process, and yet the game journalists refuse to disclose or acknowledge the plethora of objective points that any game has. It's pathetic really, and emphasise how reasonable these demands are, and how unreasonable and arrogant the game journalists are being. Then again they've had many years of railing and preaching at their audience to become accustomed to it, must be hard to let go of their self righteous posturing. Edit: More than ever I believe that a regulaory board is needed for game journalism, as well as a period of sharp adjustments and heavy fines for those whom flagrantly flout journalistic ethics such as Kotaku. Sorry to seem to be disagreeing with you again but this is another point I fail to take seriously as I think you guys have convinced yourselves its real and relevant There is this view that gaming journalists should be judged the same as real journalists...they are discussing a game, they aren't updating us on the Ukraine conflict. Why do you guys care about the integrity of reviews on RPS for example? Is this a website you use to get informed views from? It is a legitimate issue. I wouldn't put them on the same level as war correspondents. Rather, they're doing consumer reports. Being a consumer reporter is all about building trust and a reputation for integrity. Entanglements are inevitable, but its not unreasonable to expect disclosure. In the case of the inciting incident, I don't expect the journalist to say "I highly recommend this game but keep in mind I slept with the developer" but he should have listed her as a friend or recused himself from writing that particular review. That said, the reaction is disproportionate even if this is worth taking seriously and even if I'm only talking about the "legit" wing of GG. On r/KIA they've tried multiple times to pressure advertisers into withdrawing their ad money from Polygon and Kotaku. Argue all you want but this kind of manipulation is something that always bothers me when the activists and the chronically offended do it and I'm not going to make an exception for GG. They should be focusing their efforts on building the community they want, not tearing down the ones they don't like. They have enough resources, organization and skill in their group by now to launch their own gaming sites reflective of their values. Thats where their effort should be focused.

Sorry if this is necroposting but there is still a minor issue with the cloak that, if corrected, will prevent anyone from asking this question again. On the cloak of the tireless defender, the word "Recovery" in "Constant Recovery" is clickable. So rather than getting the description for the "Constant Recovery" fighter ability, you get the description of the "Recovery" action mechanic. If you fixed this along with making sure the clickable entry lists the stats and modifiers for Constant Recovery, that should clear it up.

Ever since I downloaded the current patch 1.05 from the Steam Beta channel, the developer commentary has been being cut short. I haven't timed it yet but they get several sentences in before it clips. Not sure if its doing it after a fixed amount of time or within a certain amount of time of the comment being concluded.

Is it worth it? I keep looking at it and wondering if the loss of healing capability is worth it for the other buffs you get. Seems like you get best effect using it upfront because it will reduce damage taken while increasing your combat effectiveness enough to end combat sooner. I think I just talked myself into it.