Hell Kitty

Important issues? This is a computer game forum, there are no important issues. If you can point out how I put words in your mouth, please do so. I simply said that if you truly believed that nonsense you wrote then you were a moron. The only one crying here is you, apparently unable to deal with the fact you were insulted on a message board. But don't worry, since it's unlikely you'll you respond with anything other than another childish whine, I'll let you get the last word in, but please, try to pick something better than accusing people of crying, that's so terribly lame. Actually, they do seem to recognise the problems with the engine. There was an interview recently with Jordan Thomas at Rock Paper Shotgun discussing problems with the technology, and I recall Harvey Smith regretting not writing their own engine. Scrapping it and starting over is a huge waste of time and resources, and unless you're a Blizzard or similar company it's probably not an option.

It's cute that you managed to notice that, but not read my first post thoroughly enough. No need to cry though. Cry about what? You made a comment implying the developers chose to design the game in this way because "that is what the player wants", and I corrected you, pointing out that there never was a choice, as they only had one option. So if I didn't read your thoroughly enough, what is it that I'm not seeing? Because it seems to me to be a petty way to dismiss people when you have nothing left to argue.

I take it then you've had experience with the subject in Eddo's thread? You don't need experience in something to understand it, to feel something about it, and having first hand experience doesn't automatically mean your view is more true than someone who hasn't. I know a woman who angrily calls her two kids (5 & 12) "****ing freaks" or "little retards" whenever they do something that bothers her. As much as I insist this is emotional abuse, she claims it's no big deal because they know she is only joking. As I don't have any kids of my own, I guess she knows best.

Good thing I don't believe that then. But another thing that would be helpful would be for you to find where I wrote that expected/demanded/wanted streaming areas, or did you try to put your words in my mouth like a moron? My point was that they designed a PC game within the 64 MB limitations of the original Xbox, thus having to chop up every level into tiny pieces. I don't think any player in the world prefers tiny, chopped up levels with huge loading times between them before big levels. It was a huge step backwards in game design, no matter which game you compare it to. Developers are actually trying to decrease loading times (even eradicate them completely) these days. Even a moron would know that. "Most games are going for the free-form, no loading times route nowadays." You didn't say that you expected/demanded/wanted streaming areas in DX:IW in particularly, and I never claimed you did, but you obviously brought it up for a reason. The problem wasn't just the limitation of the xbox, it was the limitations of the crap job they did with the engine, regardless of the system it was running on. Poor implementation of technology is a completely different kettle of fish to an intentional design decision. And it's cute that you were so hurt by my insult that you felt the need to use the same insult on me twice.

There wasn't one at all, that's the problem.

That's not true. The most powerful weapons consume much more ammo than less powerful weapons, so it would be stupid to waste a huge chunk if it's not needed. I don't think unified ammo is the problem really, it's the fact that reloading is unnecessary. The fact that the different factions didn't seem to care whether you crossed them was horrible, and the cramped levels (with the same set of textures used to skin almost everything) were too damn small, but as for the constant loading of different areas instead of streaming areas without any loading, if you truly believe they designed it that way then you're a moron.

I had a 7950 GX2 (the XFX XXX) and it was great, but sadly it died not long ago. I now have an 8600 and while it might now be as powerful as the old card, I've kinda moved on to the 360 as a gaming platform, with the PC for older or less intensive games. Mind you the 8600 performs better than I expected.

It's not the comparisons that make a rabid fanboy, it's the apparent anger with which those comparisons are made. Another bit of rabid fanboyism I don't get is the sense of entitlement people seem to have. "I bought all their PC games and now they've gone console?!? ****ing sellouts!". They make the game, you buy it, after that they don't owe you anything. Particularly bad if the person making the complaint is a pirate. Oh, and Resident Evil 4 is proof a sequel doesn't need to be exactly like what came before. Sand loses.

I guess that's the problem. There was a demo of a game I played a couple of years ago that was clearly inspired in part by DX, can't remember the name. I think it was german and took place underground. Boiling Point also had elements of DX. Neither were as good as DX:IW, but they didn't have years of anticipation behind them. Plus I thought it was a rather ugly game. Only the npc models and textures were decent. Whose general belief, those same rabid fanboys? I know the game changed developer at some point, which isn't the sign of a game on track. I don't think rabid SC fanboys was the intended audience anyway, just as BG:DA wasn't made for hardcore D&D nuts.

Eidos and Blizzard both disagree (Deus Ex 3 that became Winback and Starcraft: Ghost). Though the Winback thing supposedly resulted from the poor performance of Deus Ex: Invisible War on the market. It (IW) was a good game, though! I blame the rabid fanboys. Winback? Don't you mean Project: Snowblind? I enjoyed DX:IW well enough, but it was still a big disappointment. I think it was this attitude from more reasonable (and attractive) fellows like myself they were worried about, not the rantings of the more rabid nutjobs. One disappointment followed by an all action spin-off doesn't exactly do the DX name any favours. Mind you, publishers probably consider all gamers who spend time on message boards rabid. I'm not familiar with S:G, I thought it was cancelled for being generally poo.

Currently playing Dead Rising, and I'm about to let Brad die so I can go through the game without having to worry about the story.

Actually it makes a lot of sense. No, it really doesn't. First of all, when all we know about the game is "CIA", we may be able to guess on some environments and weapons, but the gameplay could be anything. And there is no such thing as console specific environments and weapons. The chances of it having real time combat would probably be pretty damn good, but nowadays there are more turn-based games on console anyway. Well, now you've won me over, of the very small number of PC games that used these perspectives, none of them worked as well as similar games on console, no sir. Pumpkin frog bucket, purple moon sunlight.

No, they be should be part of some kind of secret training program, which would justify all sorts of mad RPG skills. The game would start with an amnesic player character after a job gone wrong who goes on a quest to find The Truth and eventually make out with Franka Potente. Good lord that makes absolutely no sense at all. Congratulations.

Unlikely. Bioshock gets heat from rabid SS2 fanboys for not being enough like it. I don't think rabid fanboys of any game make enough of a difference to publishers. Do you give a sequel a number to bring back fans of the original game, risking turning away those who haven't the originals? What about using a new title or a subtitle instead in so to bring in new gamers while risking having old fans dismiss it as just a spin-off or a copy? I don't think there is any right answer when deciding to create a sequel or spin-off or new franchise. If anything, I'd say that Bioshock has probably proven that a new SS2 style game can be a success, so EA have gone for a new franchise too rather than dragging out an old one.

^ What a completely ridiculous argument. Bioshock wasn't the new System Shock, anymore than Icewind Dale was the new Baldur's Gate, or Splinter Cell the new Metal Gear (or Thief), or Quake 4 the new Doom 3. Is it really that hard to see why similar types/styles of games might be made? Perhaps you've heard of the word "genre"?

If you're a fan of Front Mission you really can't go wrong. I imported 4 from Canada and modded my aus PS2 just to play it.

I just finished Medal of Honor: Airborne, and I've been vacationing in The Sims 2. I was planning on replaying Bioshock, but I think I'll replay The Darkness and Dead Rising first.

10 days until Front Mission DS. Not a sequel, but it's coming out. Is that the original game? I've played a translated rom of that one (and I don't have a DS). I want shiny next-gen wanzers.

Thief 4 Deus Ex 3 Dead Rising 2 Midwinter 3 Another Front Mission in english

It's from Hellgate London

I haven't played Bioshock yet, but what you're saying is that we should cut it some slack because, compared to really crappy shooters, it's not so bad. It's Half Life, all over again. How do you get it's not bad compared to crap shooters from it's a brilliant and deep shooter? Only in the minds of fanboys.

I love you Mus. Get a sex change and have my babies. And as for "modern take", I remember something about ISA doing a Thief 4 that was a remake of TDP in a modern setting, before they died, of course.

I had to uninstall AVG to be able to install the demo, as it said setup.exe had a trojan or somesuch. This problem seems pretty common, but I'd not heard of a fix for it.

The list in in the back of the manual, though it doesn't say which characters they played. I too thought she sounded liked Delacroix, but she isn't listed in the manual. Oh, and as for spoilers, I found the good ending to be the happiest ending I've seen for a long time. It was very nice, tugged at the heartstrings etc. I've seen a number of complaints around that people don't like being locked into the bad ending because they only harvested a few girls and saved the rest. Because killing a whole bunch of little girls is bad, but killing a couple isn't too bad at all.