Hell Kitty

I really like her. Probably my favorite character in BG2. Well written and a very interesting side quest. I feel he same way. We must be triplets! It's the only explanation.

A colourful cast of characters and "exaggerated realism" is a far cry from Devil May Cry anime craziness. ' The article actually say "We started real world, it was boring, so we made it a little more extreme; not comic-book levels".

Both versions got similar reviews from critics, and the game was generally disliked by both console and PC gamers. In what way do you think console controllers are more simplistic compared to keyboard and mouse? The mouse will always be faster than the analogue stick, but that's not a complexity issue, and while the keyboard has more keys, more keys doesn't equal more complex. Thief on PC, for example, uses 5 keys for movement, and 2 more keys to modify movement speed. The same level of functionality can be achieved with one analogue stick. Triggers and pressure sensitive buttons allow for functionality not seen on PC as well. The difficulty in performing complex tasks depends on software. Anyway, complex doesn't equal good. Trespasser on PC features a complex control system that makes usually simple tasks, like picking up items, a needlessly complex chore. PC gaming will always have modding as a plus, but that has nothing to the supposed simplicity of console gamers. Just look at content like the hundreds of skimpy clothing for Oblivion. Not the product of a complex mind. I'm not even sure what you mean here. Consoles don't need to optimize thanks to fixed hardware. Altering the control setup depends on the game, just like PC, though it's true most console games have a fixed setup. This is just nonsense. I dare you to tell me that PC gamers all have exactly the same mindset, expectations and tastes as each other. The same is true of PC RPG gamers or console gamers. None of these groups is some sort of hivemind. And where do people like me, who are both PC and console gamers fit into your black and white view of gamers. If developers really do think this way then is just shows that they don't really understand consoles as a system. I don't think they believe this anyway. Streamlining and simplifying is a result of the popularity of gaming as a whole, not just gaming on one system. Arcade style gaming isn't exclusive to consoles, just look at the popularity of casual gaming on PC, all the hidden object and gem and dinner dash stuff. AP isn't a PC game, it's a multiplatform game. It's not about "how can we make this PC game more interesting to console gamers", it's "how do we make this game appealing to modern gamers". You've completely misunderstood. I'm not saying unlimited ammo is a good idea, I'm pointing out that your belief that it is an appeal to console gamers is wrong, by showing that it's a feature that has appeared in past PC games. Honestly, from your post I'd be suprised if you have any real experience with console gaming.

If I knew that I'd be making oodles of cash as a game designer. Oodles. That's true. Weapons choice in games all too often comes down to little more than what you'd like to use, with most weapons being effective in all circumstances. Just don't use shotguns for long range or sniper rifles at close range. Same old, same old. I still think it's a case or either make ammo conservation an important element of gameplay (such as in survival horror) or don't make it an issue at all. All or nothing. I'd prefer the former, as I would have expected something like Gorth mentions, with your supplies being limited due to your rogue status. Of course I still want them to rip off the RE4 inventory system because I love playing inventory tetris. I can't pimp that **** enough. If ammo is especially limited, they'd also need to allow us to pick up enemy weapons, and no one is complaining about that, does that mean people have no objection to not being able to collect enemy weapons? Shame, I'd love a Hitman style weapons collection deal. An interesting choice of weapons and the ability to mod them if more important to me though. Anyway, a while ago I was playing through the terrorist hunt levels in Rainbow Six Vegas 2, using only the pistol, which *gasp* features unlimited ammo. Whether you like it or not isn't relevant (that's for you Gorgon) to what I'm getting at, having a neverending supply of clips doesn't turn you into the super man that Xard seems to think it will. Even when I was using the glock with it's ability to pump out a lot more bullets than other pistols I don't have a completely different play style compared to the limited weapons. The article mentions nothing about special weapons for boss fights, or even any boss fights at all, only that special weapons will have limited ammo. All this could mean is that we won't have an unlimited supply of explosives. Maybe sniper rifles will count as special and be limited? Who knows. It's too early to get out panties in a tizz about specifics. Of course it's also early enough that combined whining could lead to change. Everybody wins! Like it or not, regenerating health is a way to remove to med kit hunt element that features in so many games. Accusing devs of using the feature because they are lazy just reeks of a poor attempt at insulting devs for implementing a feature you don't like. Dude you need to stop saying that, it just make you look stoopid. Didn't Diablo give you an unlimited amount of arrows? Was that Blizzards attempt to appeal to those console kiddiez that can't quite get their head around the concept of limited ammunition, a concept they are as familiar with as PC gamers?

You're still making a criticism based on how other people will play the game and as such that criticism just isn't valid, because you simply don't know. "I wouldn't do it but other people might." We really have no way of knowing what play style will prove most popular, especially since we don't really know a great deal about the gameplay just yet. Based on the article they are going for "exaggerated realism" so this is probably the sort of thing we will see in the game, and we often see in games whether they have limited ammo or not. People often say this, but I really don't think it's true. As a huge fan of stealth gameplay, I'd say it really just requires more patience than thought. That's exactly what I want to see. That is, certain weapons are better suited to particular situations, and making a poor choice would only make thing more difficult for you.

But then why even bother having a limited supply if the chances of running out are so slim? If they do change to limited ammo, then I hope no weapons feature an unlimited amount, and our inventory space is limited, forcing us to choose between more ammo or more weapons/items. Personally I just want every game to copy the inventory out of RE4.

That simply isn't true. If the game features stealth options that fun to play, then people will choose those options. Hitman: Blood Money is a good example this, you can play stealth as a ghost or an assassin, or you can play guns blazing FPS style. Perhaps you are unable to help yourself when faced with an unlimited or large ammo supply, but don't assume every player is the same.

It doesn't mention that specifically, it just says you have unlimited ammo except in the case of very special weapons. I see no reason to believe they'll opt for a bottomless clip over a neverending supply of them, with reloading serving the same purpose as overheating. The article also mentions that currently you can't drag bodies around to hide them (which I'd like to do more than limited ammo), but they are willing to change that if playtesting suggests people want it.

The problem with claiming that streamlining is an attempt to appeal to console gamers is that it ignores the fact that those features existed in their unstreamlined form in past console games as well as PC games.

I don't like the idea of a modern game with unlimited ammo, but then I've played enough games that might as well have had unlimited ammo, that I'm not sure I care just yet.

Fahrenheit had timed dialogue. I think it had a progress bar on screen.

I think you really need to play a bit first before deciding what mods you want. A mod that seems awesome to someone else might be a waste of bandwidth to you.

Avoiding sex just because it's sex is no different to inserting sex just because it's sex. Rip it out so we can sell it to prudes, throw it in so we can sell it to pervs. That's not true, Law & Order is a show about crime, specifically murder, and follows the detectives and prosecutors attempts to bring the criminal to justice. The effect it has on people isn't the focus of the series, it's all about bringing a criminal to justice. It's an example of a show that is generally "about crime" but doesn't need to show the actual crime taking place. Dexter, like Mr Brooks, is a story from the perspective of a killer, and like Mr Brooks isn't particularly explicit, but it also wouldn't be the same without the viewer seeing certain scenes. While you might think it's necessary to have a clever reason to exclude sex, someone else will feel it's necessary to have a clever reason to include sex. There is no one right way to tell stories that deal with certain issues. Some will need to show you certain things, some will need to keep certain things from you, others can do it either way with the inclusion or exclusion of certain things not having any real effect on the story. Mass Effect doesn't need the sex scene, but there's also no reason it can't be there. I think we're getting stuck on being "about sex", which is my fault. Most stories that feature sex tend to actually be about relationships and human interaction, of which sex is a part, like in the two examples I gave, but they aren't specifically "about sex". If the act itself is the focus, then the work is most likely erotic or pornographic in nature, where seeing the act is the whole point. Even films like "9 Songs" and "Shortbus", which feature explicit unsimulated sex scenes aren't "about sex", they are "about people". The Sims 2 is like this, it's about (sim) people and their lives, specifically their entire lives, so it's only natural sex is going to play a role. Most games aren't telling the type of stories that focus on people and relationships.

Why not? I recently saw the film Summer Clouds, which was about Robert and his cousin Marta playing a game with holidaying couple Daniel and Ana, attempting to seduce them, with the game being won once either one had sex with the husband or wife. The films shows us that Daniel and Ana are a fairly typical couple and are happy together. While Marta can't go through with seducing Daniel, Robert successfully seduces Ana, and while she is in a room changing, Robert enters, closes the door behind him and begins kissing her. The shot then changes to a shot of the door from outside the room, and it sits there for a minute or two. No one leaves the room, so the audience knows that something is happening between them but never finds out what exactly. Daniel suspects his wife cheated on him, but she denies it. Marta reveals the game to Ana, and tells her that nothing happened between her and Daniel, and asks if anything happened between Robert and Ana, but Ana refuses to answer. Robert tells Daniel it doesn't matter what happened as his wife loves him and they'll now leave and return home to their lives. Besides, Robert got what he wanted and was no longer interested in Ana. In this film, it was important that we don't see the sex scene, leaving us in the same position as Daniel, not knowing exactly what happened. In the film Unfaithful, married Connie begins an affair with Paul. She is happily married to Ed, and the film shows the audience that there isn't a problem such as a lackluster sex life that leads to the affair. Her interactions with her husband are nice and sweet, while her interactions with Paul are passionate and intense. In this film it's important to show the sex scenes between Connie and Paul in order for the audience to see just how consumed by the affair and her lover she becomes. I never said anything about cutting existing scenes out of movies, so I don't know why you are asking me this. My point is that you can tell a story about sex without needing to show any actual sex. You can have no sex, like in Summer Clouds, or quite a bit of sex, like in Unfaithful. Or you can have a story where is doesn't even matter whether we see the act or not. TV shows like Law & Order rarely show the actual murders taking place, because they are about finding the criminal and bringing them to justice. When a story is told from the point of view of the investigators, it's common for the story to start after the crime has taken place. And just to be clear I'm pointing out that tv shows and movies can be about crime and murder without actually showing the audience the act, not saying that it's fine to cut existing scenes out. A war movie might be more concerned with how soldiers deal with returning home then any actual battles. Or a journalist in a war zone trying to cope the the violence occurring around them. You can make a movie about violence without showing the actual violence, only the effects of it. I don't know of any other than Sims clone Singles, which is supposedly more focused on the actual sex but I haven't played it. Sex is typically something you'd see in a cutscene, whereas sex as a gameplay element is typically the stuff of porn games. In Mass Effect, it's basically just the payoff for completing the romance, and doesn't really add anything to the story. In GTA IV, Niko can go on dates with a number of women, and if they like him enough, he can have sex with them, although we never see the act. The point of these dates storywise, as with the outings you can go on with male friends, is really the conversations with the characters.

/Alien/? Not ftp://segapr.segaamerica.com/SEGA_GAMES/Alpha%20Protocol/ ?

Indeed. A movie/book/game/whatever being "about sex" doesn't mean it requires explicit sex or even any sex scenes at all. A story might be about the characters beliefs, fears and insecurities concerning sex and relationships without it ever being necessary to show the actual act. The irony of sex and nudity leading to an automatic "adults only" rating is that it's often used in a rather immature way, stuff like teen sex comedies. The Sims 2 is chock full of sex, and it's never explicit. It's not there to titillate, is just presented as a part of life.

You don't need to "finish" a game like Oblivion, as there is a lot of content outside the main quest. Like Hurlshot I definitely recommend SI.

I already ignore many posts without having to make use of the ignore feature.

I love the phone idea, definitely preferable to some sci-fi thingamyjig. If not a phone then a pda.

So, Tale has stoopid friends? Anyway, I thought Fable was fun, but it obviously wasn't memorable, as I can't seem to remember much about it.

Heh, same. She came close to flipping the car a number of times.

I know, I wasn't saying you were wrong, I was pointing out how badly Krookie sucks.

You're off to a good start with Oz and Carniv

I don't have a licence, nor do I know how to drive, yet I am totally awesome at driving in game.