Hell Kitty

Widescreen monitors are almost always 16:10. If the choice to force 16:9 (which is the format of almost all new TV:s today) isn't consolitis, what is your explanation for it being 16:9? Sorry, I was thinking just of widescreen in general. Including 16:9 resolutions but not 16:10 is on the same level as all the other stuff mentioned.

Because the people behind IW have nothing to do with DX3? It's using the Tomb Raider Underworld engine. Also, Thief 4 will be announced on the 11th of this month.

Obama wants to destroy America with the Socialism.

I was asking about L4D, as I've only played the demo on PC. As for the Orange Box, yes I've played both the 360 and PC versions, and as I already said they are the same game. Unlike your mates I don't have a problem with the controls, I don't find them unwieldy at all. If your mates play the PC version with a controller they'll have the same problems. You're describing a difference in the experience, not a difference in the game. Like if you play on a decent PC that runs the games smoothly and with all setting at max, you'll have a difference experience to playing it on a crummy PC that suffers from lag and with all settings at min. The experience is different, but the game is the same. If you have a problem playing using a controller, then perhaps playing with keyboard and mouse will be better for you. If you think the game is boring after playing it on console, playing it on the PC won't make it exciting because... wait for it... it's the same game.

Well I was interested in both DX3 and a possible Thief 4, but now that a stranger on the internet has whined about it I've totally lost interest.

That's like saying Left 4 Dead on the 360 and PS3 is the same game as on the PC. What's different about them?

Eidos Montreal has heavily hinted that their soon to be announced second project is a new Thief.

I don't know, I've never kept track of the amount of times people lie to me in any game. Anyway, F3 is full of dishonest, untrustworthy folks. That's simply not true. Whether or not a player feels bad about anything depends on the individual. It should be up to the player how they interpret events, the game shouldn't try to force them to feel a certain way. It has been too long since I played, only just restarting now. Have you played F3? Er, you've completely lost me here, having one what? A good artist will never need to tax the engine, they'll work within the limits they've been given.

I have heard really about things about the 360 ports, especially the controls. I don't know if he would still have gotten sick of it, but the PC version is superior AFAIK. Also, how do you get sick of Portal, it's only 6h long? What "really bad things" are those? I've played HL2 and EP1 on PC, and part of HL2, EP2 and Portal on 360. It's the same game except for the controls, which are fine unless you've never played an FPS with a controller, but then the issue is with the player and not the game. Honestly, if you don't enjoy the game on one system, you aren't going to enjoy it on another.

The issue here isn't a lack of detail. Take Rhedd's head for Morrowind as an example. They looked a hell of a lot better than the default heads, yet they had a lower poly count. There's no reason for a single head to push an engine to it's limits, you just need a good artist.

That's how F3 works, the [Lie] tag is applied to the players own dialogue options, that Planescape did it first is irrelevant. In one of the first (if not the first) dialogue options you have, Amata asks you if you were surprised regarding the birthday, and the player has the option to lie and claim they knew about it all along. If the player can lie to others, why wouldn't they assume that others can also lie to them? That's easy. Being lied to in the game works just like in real life. The NPC tells the PC a lie, and unless the PC has a reason to believe the NPC is lying, then they can choose to take them at face value. When the PC arrives at the so called slaver compound and finds it to be an average town full of average people, only naive, lazy or stupid players will continue to believe the lie, everyone else will start to suspect that things might not be what they perhaps originally thought. If the townsfolk are immediately hostile and the PC kills them, they didn't die because the PC believed the lie, they died because the PC was defending themselves, and thus the player has no reason to feel bad about the situation. Then what happens? The choice the player has to make in this situation is "do I want to get involved?", and by getting involved they are putting themselves in a position to discover the truth. This is a pretty common situation in RPGs. I was merely pointing out that there is no clever AI involved in what you're asking for, it's really basic. If the game keeps track of player actions, either on a reputation screen the player can view, or completely behind the scenes, then quests can be offered or denied based on past actions. For example, an NPC might deny you a diplomatic mission as they don't believe you're up to the task based on your history of violence. But it's impossible for the AI to determine if the player can be lied to, because the game can't determine your reasons for choosing a quest.

What's wrong with playing Portal and HL2 on the 360? It's the same game. Do you think if he'd played them on PC he wouldn't have gotten "insanely sick" of them?

The player is introduced to deceit in the very beginning of Fallout 3. Some of the first dialogue options you have include lies (options with the [Lie] tag), and we quickly learn that the Overseer cannot be trusted. Why would players then go out into the big bad dangerous wasteland trusting everyone they come across? In any game I play, if I am able to communicate with an NPC, even one I'm on a quest to kill, then I will talk with them first. I've played enough games to know that if I just kill them I might be missing out. For example, maybe I can make them a counter offer. Also, your example doesn't actually require clever AI. If the player has bad karma, then the quest-giver tells you the truth, "I want you to kill some people for me, you up for it?". If the player has good karma, the quest-giver lies, "Won't you please rescue my daughter from the horrible slavers?".

Due to laziness to do proper porting form 16:9 TV view to all PC monitors types. Thus, "consolitis". Um, you do know not all TVs are widescreen, right? The same problem exists for both PC and console users. If you don't have a widescreen monitor(PC) or widescreen TV(console) then you'll be forced to play in a letterboxed mode. It has nothing to do with consoles or porting, and everything to do with developers believing that the only true way to experience their game is in widescreen. Thus, not "consolitis".

All the old Lucasarts adventures.

Um, I guess you've never heard of widescreen monitors? That's not "consolitis", it's developers not supporting non-widescreen modes.

I think the original Dead Rising was actually the first game to use the MT Framework engine. Anyway, I'm currently replaying Assassin's Creed, looking for flags in the kingdom. Apparently in the sequel collecting flags will actually unlock stuff. Also playing the Saint's Row 2 DLC.

It's says little because it doesn't go into what a game did right to get those sales, but it's more than "sales are not an indicator of quality" which says nothing at all. Sales also aren't an indicator of a lack of quality. It's like when people bring up popularity, and the common response is "just because people like it, doesn't mean it's good", which is an equally useless claim. While popularity doesn't mean something is good, it also doesn't mean it's bad, so what are we supposed to get from statements like these? Such statements are meant as a dismissal. "Popularity/sales aren't an indication of quality, therefore popularity/sales are irrelevant." It's the equivalent of saying "Yeah, so? That doesn't mean anything", but of course it does mean something, it means the product is doing something right/wrong. If one defines quality as "a product with high sales", then obviously the statement "sales are not an indicator of quality" is incorrect. If one is willing to dismiss sales and popularity, why would critical acclaim be any different? Obviously it's not, given how common it is for people to accuse reviewers of being bribed, victims of hype, or just plain lying. I like this. Not just the PC helping the leader make decisions though, but the PCs actions determining what kind of person the leader becomes.

The faction stuff is right up my proverbial alley. I'd like to know if, should I choose as my handler the guy who prefers stealth but I go in guns blazing, will that piss him off and damage my relationship with that faction? As for the gun thing, it seems like weapons disappear in conversations, which doesn't surprise me. It looks like the weapons we see equipped on the character are purely for our benefit, and aren't acknowledged by NPCs. I'm also guessing that the gun we pull out in conversations will always be the pistol we start out with, much like how cutscenes work in RE5.

Sales are not an indicator of quality. Sales indicate the product is doing something right, which is what the "lol Oblivion is just bad" crowd seems to miss. People need to stop seeing praise as a defense of some objectively bad game and criticism as an attack on an objectively good game. Of course it can be hard to take people seriously when they have such an obvious bias against certain companies. I always assumed the codex being censored on the Bethesda boards had more to do with their general attitude and vulgarity. Unless everyone who gave Oblivion a bad review is banned there then that excuse is nonsense.

That conversation was to explain why the player character starts out in a cell. The dirty minx.

I dunno, I think he can pull it off:

2,4,8360,21840,10912,5440,10880,5440,10880,21824,10912,21824,8352,16384,32768,65 536

http://kotaku.com/5219584/new-fallout-announced

I remember enjoying the combat in the demo, but thought the driving felt stiff (or something) compared to GTA3. When I got to briefly try the full game years later I recall some taxi mission at the start that put me off completely.