Hell Kitty

No, it's nothing like that. Thief is like Deus Ex, you have particular goals to complete and you are free to complete them how you see fit, using any or none of the tools available to you. Thief players don't choose to ghost missions because the system is flawed, because it isn't flawed, they choose to play it that way because they enjoy the extra challenge. I tend to play DX using stealth, whether it's harder or easier than a combat style is irrelevant to me, I play the way I enjoy. The same is true of games like Hitman or MGS.

Actually in Thief 1 & 2, the weapons and tools you had left in a mission didn't carry over into the next one. The reason for this is the developers didn't want you to hoard your items, they wanted you to use the tools they've provided. Better to use them and have fun with them than think "I should probably save these for later" and never end up using them. Of course that doesn't stop you choosing to play without using your weapons, which increases the challenge if that's what you want. I think unlimited ammo could have the same effect, you'll use the weapons you want to use, rather than saving them for later and using something lesser. Like I said in the other thread, this simply isn't true. If the game features stealth options that are fun to play, then people will choose those options. Using all the tools you have in Thief makes for a much easier game than playing through without using any tools at all, but that doesn't stop the latter being a very popular play style, even when it doesn't offer any additional rewards over the easier style other than the satisfaction of having done it.

They're both dependant on which way the screen is facing, but entirely independent of each other. The vehicle controls are the same as on foot, pushing forward moves you into the screen, rather than being accelerate, and it's hardly suprising that the turrent is always going to be pointing at the cross hair in the middle of the screen. Nope, the controls are simple and strafing is easy, your inability to handle the controls doesn't make for bad design. It's an action/adventure, regardless of how big the stick up CrashGirl's butt is. The problem is she's an anti-fangirl, as passionate about attacking a game as fanboys are in praising it as the best thing ever.

^?

They are independent, left stick for movement and right stick for aiming, but is seems to be buggy. I'm replaying right now, and most of the time it seems to work fine, but sometimes aiming in a particular direction cause the Mako to move forward. A moment ago I was neither moving nor aiming, and simply using the left trigger to zoom in caused the Mako to move forward, and continue to move forward until I performed some other action. So like I said, buggy.

There is no such thing as a red moon. You probably have eye cancer.

I just completed the game. It was fab. Now I must go sleep. What titles did people get? I got: Eagle - High headshot count Hawk - For receiving lots of praise from fellow PMCs Hyena - High item collection Pig - High use of health items Crocodile - Merciless soldier, killed a whole lotta folks Panther - Rarely died, spotted frequently and killed untold number of enemies As you can probably tell I didn't play through very stealthily. Using a borrowed PS3 I was really just playing through for the story, though I enjoyed the gameplay immensely. Man, AP has a lot to live up to when it comes to delivering stealth and action...

The PS2 is backwards compatible with PS1 games, so if you could find yourself a copy of MSG you'd be set, although, yes, it does look quite old now. The Twin Snakes on Gamecube is MSG1 done with the MGS2s gameplay and engine. Personally I think it's inferior to the PS1 original. I think you'd be missing out on quite a bit if you haven't played all the games in the series.

I bought the game today. I wasn't planning on it, I just saw it in the store and I couldn't help myself, I couldn't not buy it. I'll borrow my nephews PS3 this weekend to play it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/10/gayrights.greece

Or maybe she'll ditch that punk for some hot blue alien action.

That is the correct answer.

Smith regretted the decision not to develop their own engine sometime during development, so the comparison doesn't really stand.

I really hope it gets ported to the 360, because I don't want to buy a PS3 just for this one game, but I will, damnit.

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.