alanschu

Precisely, and Fallout is a game that awards the player a huge degree of freedom. No choice that I make in Planescape: Torment is a choice that the game designers didn't allow me to make.

So how do you reconcile wanting to do something, but the game developer not accounting for it? For instance, how do you reconcile Kreia in KOTOR 2, yet still adhere to your definition? The game prevents you from giving your character the motivation of "I want her off my ship" or rather, performing that motivation. Is it just a case where, in the case of Obsidian's games, they happen to have allowed you to play your characters in the way that you want? (This is still effective. The original Deus Ex had good enough writing that, by the time the player had to choose between UNATCO and the NSF, most wanted to say "Eff UNATCO." So that the choice was merely an illusion is inconsequential to most people... they still feel like the game is granting them a choice.) I agree that the story is more than just dialogue choices. Still, by your description, it'd sound like you'd consider an Elder Scrolls game to be superior to Planescape: Torment, since Torment has a pretty defined narrative, whereas Bethesda's games do not. (It's fine if you prefer them, I'm just trying to understand your perspective, because I consider Torment's strength to be it's fantastic writing, because through the fantastic writing I am able to empathize with the characters, even if my TNO does not). At least with Planescape: Torment you have amnesia (or rather, a whole new persona), but in other games like KOTOR 2, you have a defined history that you cannot ignore. Your character MUST have followed Revan to Malachor. You can spin reasons within the context of the game as a form of justification, but that's just rationalizing the decision. It's allowing you to place your influence on the character, but in the end there's nothing the player can do about the fact that you traveled to Malachor V.

Haha, again it's a human element (and I agree). "Why should it matter if you hide the names? Are you implying I can't be impartial!? :@:@:@:@" And I've seen the name expectation occur, although as an anecdote. I remember a B student submitted an essay for an elective in Grade 8. She got about a 70. An A student (the top student in the class actually), literally copied the essay and submitted it the following year, and was given a 90. That's not to say that the teacher went "Oh look, it's this person. Well, I should give her a high mark." I wouldn't at all, however, be surprised that a statement that is more ambiguous could be better interpreted if the marker has an expectation that the student is keen, as opposed to poor.

I enjoyed Cracked's response to this. http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/a-30-second-guide-to-how-gay-marriage-ruling-affects-you/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=fanpage&utm_campaign=new+article&wa_ibsrc=fanpage

Agreed.

Which one would that be? In PST, you can decide what the story of TNO is. In KOTOR 2, you can decide what the story of The Exile is. In NWN2, you can decide what the story of the Spirit-Eater is. In FONV, you can decide what the Couriers story is. The way I see it, all of the games he has worked on that are hailed as "RPG Gold" do that. How do you define "what the story of the character is" because for each of your examples I see "You're allowed to make the decisions that the game allows you to make." Decide to say "Eff this, I don't care about tracking down my past" in Planescape: Torment, and you get an absolute shell of a game that requires you to miss out on a ton of the content. Decide that you hate Kreia and want nothing to do with her in KOTOR 2, and you literally can't. She comes with you, and there's nothing you can do about that. You must go to Malachor. You must visit the planets before hand. You can't decide to visit Coruscant, or Naboo. You are inherently restricted by what the game allows you to do. Fallout New Vegas is a game that grants much, MUCH more freedom for what the player may want to do, and due to the open world nature of the game, you are certainly free to neglect the primary plot of the game and still accomplish a lot of things. I wouldn't consider this to necessarily be the strength of the game, however. The strength was a great merging of open-world gameplay yet still having a strong narrative that allows for player choice.

Fair enough. In that case, however, it's still no different than had the name been shared (i.e. it's not a detriment by hiding the name). The place where I would (logically infer - i.e. I may be wrong) that there'd be benefits would be for reviews done for newer people in the field. Or in the event where one person got lambasted for something (justly), but has since made some good findings. Are there any overt negatives for hiding the name?

Ironically I would consider his best RPG to be the one where he doesn't do that.

Or just start annoying the right people! >.>

Didn't go through the whole thread, but anti-water voodoo! http://techland.time.com/2013/06/24/neverwet-what-kind-of-strange-sick-and-wonderful-water-repelling-voodoo-is-this/

Was it a legal thing, or a public opinion thing?

I got that vibe too. Based on the article, he only reinforced that reviewers should be anonymous. Though it was also a good point that there's really no reason for the submitter to have his or her name shared either. I mean, some here judged the original article based on where it was originally submitted. Peer review, like anything with a human element, is not going to be immune to human corruption. I do not think that unmitigated submissions would be ideal, however. Since peer review is a human endeavor, however, I think it does lead into the idea of the original article of enabling rationalization. Since the peer review process is innately fallible, it now becomes possible to be dismissive of evidence based on a general belief that the system is corrupt. Though, myself included, our confirmation bias has us less concerned about the system when we agree with the findings.

Nah, has to be the Predator handshake. Much better than a brofist. I would buy the game just for that. I literally just told a cindesigner that he needs to make this happen.

I really think how MoMX does will probably be the real test case; the Kickstarters - while successful - by their funding nature might make it an attractive but unsure area to dabble in. If MoMX does boffo, I think that added with the Kickstarter success, then yeah I could see more publishers looking at smaller budget but strong-selling niche games. The thing that most excited me about Kickstarters is that it'll serve (hopefully) as a point that "forgotten game styles" are still quite viable. I'm still trying to figure out who I need to plead to to make another X-Wing/TIE Fighter game!

I actually prefer the squad respawn points to just the squad leader. I found if I was squad leader, it made me too passive (and not really "leading the squad") in BF2.

That's us, not Aussie. There's a documentary on the subject called 'Black Sheep'. Australia may have an R18 classification now but it seems to be pretty much exactly the same practically as the old MA15- and due to the way most distribution is handled we get saddled with their classification or lack of it as well. Great documentary!

Broken Age was mismanaged?

Thanks for affirming the thesis of the paper! (I wish I had actually written down my prediction of your response, in retrospect) Reading your link: Can you think of any good reason why it may be advantageous to not pay reviewers, and for them to be anonymous? EDIT: Why would it matter what someone's sense of humor is like, like the author supposes?

For me, it's not about listening quality; it's about using a lossless data container. While I may not be able to hear the difference, I can definitely see it when examining the raw frequencies, (which, by the way, would easily show which of yours were upscaled and which ones weren't). I just don't...listen to music in lossy containers, (such as .mp3). Not entirely sure why. Probably an OCD thing. Doesn't really matter on the actual game for me, but having true .flacs SOMEWHERE, I think, is a necessity. Also, .ogg vorbis is superior and free, so if we're using a lossy format, we should probably use that instead of .mp3 garbage. Is it necessary to watch your audio?

Sword of the Stars 2

I agree, well grounded. I find articles like this more interesting for my own introspection. Being cognizant of it. I'm less inclined for some of the more preachy aspects (yes, studies can be wrong). It reminds me a lot of this Cracked article (posted this one before), especially point #1: http://www.cracked.com/article_19468_5-logical-fallacies-that-make-you-wrong-more-than-you-think.html People *really* hate to be wrong, and I know I have been like this as well. The the point where I am pretty sure I have argued "black is white."

It really made me appreciate Chuck Daly as a coach. Sounds like he did some savvy things, especially in the games against the college stars.

I wouldn't disagree, though that wasn't really the point of the article. When someone presents science that goes against what you believe to be true, there's a greater chance that you'll reject it (regardless of its scientific validity), and that often the more educated people are, the more cemented they are in their beliefs. It's suggested that this may be because their are more capable of coming up with reasoning that is well thought out to rationalize their rejection of the findings. As such, you'll find that there are people that prefer to believe in "just guessing" (or rather, logical inferences) despite data suggesting otherwise.

I enjoyed reading through this: https://medium.com/mother-jones/adfa0d026a7e The synopsis is assessing how we look at science, and some of the resistance we may have to evidence simply because it doesn't fall in line with what we believe. Note that there is some climate control talk, although it talks about how being a Republican or a Democrat is a predictor as to whether or not you believe the claims. I find this pretty interesting, personally.

Since KJ was mentioned, I was reminded of this scene. Against one of the best shot blockers in the league, very much in his prime to boot. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVcSndz52DE That play absolutely floored me when it happened! EDIT: Hah! Then I stumbled upon this! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAEoMsHHfa4