Hell Kitty

That's exactly what the first few pictures in that list look like to me, or marks on the photo or some such. I wonder who decided they were UFOs?

I enjoyed the demo but it's all a bit too fast for me. Which I expected. Sure was pretty though.

I didn't think the Fallout 3 ending was bad, but there could have been more too it. I just completed Far Cry 2 and I thought the end of that was pretty interesting. Now to complete Dead Space. I probably also try the L4D demo.

Amen. Generally if I've been playing one type of game, I won't want to jump into something too similar, but I think I'll always favour a "real world" modern day setting.

I miss the days when the tutorial was separate from the main game.

I played the demo and found it fun, I agree with the review that said it's like a first person platformer. It's actually the opposite of what I usually like in first person games, taking things slowly and exploring. I like the parkour in Assassin's Creed better because in that when I fail I injure myself and need to find another way, but in this the checkpoint reloads and I try again. I'll probably end up buying it though, whore that I am. I know red is "runners vision" or whatever and is supposed to be the ideal route, but do other colours mean anything? I seemed to be traveling along a lot of yellow.

I've tried to make myself climb the ladder to enter the roof space (through the ceiling hole in the closet) to check it out, but as soon as I step on the 3rd or 4th step and it wobbles, I panic and go back down. Strangely, I can run around a steep cliffside area or stand on a balance beam or climb a tree or whatever, without a problem. But ladders...*shudder*... My fear of heights is really a fear of falling resulting in injury or death. Wobbly ladders are the worst. I can fly a glider just fine, and I ain't been higher than that.

Flavour. Misc radio signals all lead to bunkers where you typically find interesting items. all but one I found used morse code. You can find the radio, turn it off and the broadcast will disappear from your list.

Arguing over what makes "a big deal" is fascinating.

My dear friend random n00b, Is this tendency of yours to misrepresent people everytime you get the chance a learned skill or you're just that obnoxious? Cry me a river, you're a master of misrepresentation. That's right! Boycotting or destruction of a product isn't making a big deal about it, it's extreme overreaction. I was referring to the fact that it seems to be such a popular topic out there in internet land, even articles have been written on the issue. But nevermind that, I'll be honest with you, yes, I am deeply bothered that people are discussing this issue. Love and kisses, your pal, Hell Kitty

Being able to kill kids makes for a great game? The fact that people make such a big deal about this and the sex/spooning thing is just further proof that developers shouldn't listen to fans. Anyway, regarding going back to 101: ? On completing the , playing it straight the whole time,

Nope, considering most games, including those two, are released here at roughly the same time as the rest of the world. It's actually extremely rare for games to be released months after the US, and it's generally due to a ban, such as with Dark Sector, which was released months later after content was cut.

I got four letters from Burke, but the final one said something about freeing me or some such rubbish. In Girdershade(?) I met a crazy woman who just LOVES

Is ridiculous a bad thing? As someone pretty ridiculous, the answer is no. But I prefer interesting and fun to ridiculous and serious. Dear Maria Caliban, Please give yourself an uppercut. Love, Hell Kitty

A really simple and seemingly meaningless choice in Front Mission 3 (want to go to the mall with your friend?) leads to a completely different campaign! Minor characters from one campaign become major allies in another. Stereotypically nasty enemies become sympathetic allies. Of course that's not really a choice and consequence thing as it is an odd way to choose from Campaign A or Campaign B. The original Fallouts are always hailed as the champions of choice and consequence, but like you point out, what you do in one town doesn't affect the others. Major changes don't occur until the game is over. The consequences in games tend to be fairly basic, rather than dramatically changing the story or gameplay. I guess it's our ability to make a choice that matters more then that choice having a huge impact on the game. Feeling like our choices matter is more important than dramatic change.

I think analysing why fictional universes are the yway they are can be interesting, but when it gets too serious it becomes ridiculous. Like on the old Interplay boards, the discussion on why DnD trolls are killed by their own stomach acids. Swimmers bodies are supposed to be all that, but it ain't true of female swimmers. No it most definitely isn't. Oh, and to answer Maria Caliban's question, no I don't know anyone who dresses like that because I don't know any douches. You still look like Clark Kent though, right?

The problem I have isn't reloading, it's specifically when the reloading animation plays as though the character can take all the time in the world, which looks ridiculous when under heavy fire. It's only ever bothered me in a first person titles due to the animations being so in your face. I still don't really understand why repetitive animations are only a problem for you when performed by the player character. What animations from the MGS4 video you watched stood out as being annoyingly repetitive? I think something like this would be less of an issue when actually playing, rather than simply watching. The protagonists arms almost always stay in view in first person games, so surely repetitive animation would be worse in that perspective due to player animations being even more limited, seeing as how the only animations tend to be holding, firing and reloading weapons. I've played loads of both! Though I don't really know quite what you mean by artistic. Earlier you said "I find the characters rather cartoonish with poor facial expressions, which is characteristic to third person games" which is complete and utter rubbish. I don't know how anyone can have this sort of view, even someone who points out they have limited experience with third person games, because the perspective used in a game has nothing to do with the quality of its animations, nor how cartoonish or realistic the graphics style is. Fallout 3 has recently been hammered for the quality of its animations, and Deus Ex is known for rather basic, and sometimes downright silly animations (like characters running while revolving on the spot). Half-Life 2 has fantastic facial animations, but it looks ridiculous when characters have a conversation with me while walking backwards. Older Metal Gear Solid titles have had low polygonal and low res textured models, but they've always been superbly animated. Of course it's possible to find good and bad examples in both perspectives, because as I said perspective has nothing to do with the quality of its animations, nor how cartoonish or realistic the graphics style is. I've always preferred first-person, with most of my favourite games being from this perspective, but I think it was Sawyer who said something along the lines of preferring third-person due to being able to see (and enjoy) your character performing different actions, and I tend to agree with this. It's especially true of games where I can customize the look of my character, which feels pointless if I'm not going to see the end result. I know folks like to talk about how FP is so much more immersive, because it's more real, like you are the character, rather than merely controlling them, but there is something about that I don't get. If you're playing Hitman: Blood Money and switch from the default third person to a first person view, does the game suddenly become more immersive? "Whoa, now I feel like I totally am 47!" Do the assassinations become all the more disturbing because you, the player, are now the one performing them, whereas previously you were simply watching 47 do it all? The same is true of all games with multiple views. Does Thief: Deadly Shadows become less immersive when switching to third person? Does a player no longer feel like Logan Keller when taking cover in Rainbow Six, Vegas? In cases like this "immersive" means little more than "I prefer it this way". My take on the whole controlling my character versus being my character is that no matter how I do it, through their eyes, from over their shoulder, or from high above them, I'm always controlling my character. Some games give me direct control (Thief, in first person, Splinter Cell in third) while some I must direct their actions (BG series). Part of the reason I like the first person perspective is the same as many people, the whole seeing through the players eyes deal. But it's not really like seeing through a persons eyes, it's like, well, exactly what it is, looking through a camera. Which is as close as we're going to get when looking at a monitor or TV. This is why movies and tv shows rarely use this perspective. Pointing out that movies or tv shows also don't have the camera constantly over the shoulder of the protagonist is pointless, because we don't control any of the characters in a movie or tv show. Now if seeing the back of your character is really such a big issue that it stops you from enjoying a game, then third person games are definitely not for you, but no developer is ever going to change their design based on personal gripes like this.

Headfirst had a whole bunch of sequels planned before DCotE even came out. Two for Xbox and/or PC and one for PS2. Their problems weren't due to Bethesda, they simply bit off way more than they could possibly hope to chew. Yeah, as much as folks like to come up with all sorts of conspiracy theories as to why a company isn't making whatever it is they want them to make, it's business.

It's got nothing to do with weapon strengths or weakness, it's that the animation is the same both in and out of combat, and when you have an NPC in your face trying to kill you it looks ridiculous having the player taking their sweet time with a long reload animation as if they don't have a care in the world. Anyway, if the repetition of animations is a problem I don't see why it would only be a problem for the player character, and not for the NPCs.

Huh? That's true of any game, no matter the perspective. In fact the only time this has ever bothered me is in first person games when, in the middle of a firefight the player character takes their sweet time reloading while being shot in the face.

Disappointing.

^ What the hell is that an ad for?

Same. Doesn't help that I sink rather than float. Also moths. I don't know why, I must have repressed a bad childhood experience or something. Also I suffer from social anxiety and loathe situations where I am the center of attention.

In Andale, those , are they part of a quest, or is it just up to the player to decide their fate if ?

Thanks guys!