Tale

Using a defined protagonist is "kicking over the sandcastle," now. :/

I guess I was hoping for the player character to be a little less special. Oh well. Were you wanting to be the dragonborn's errand boy? Always more interesting to be the power behind the throne rather than on the throne itself. Isn't that a completely separate concept? If anything, being "special" and being "the power" are more similar elements than the throne.

They are far too planning and scheming for a major assault. They first would weaken us up (see ME1) then just mop up and do the rest (see ME1). Full-scale assault seems rather... not in their repertoire. And then especially not on earth. Why do you think the strategy would be the same between having a single ship and having the entire fleet? They're a race of countless invincible capital ships. Stealth would be the exception, not the rule.

wat

I guess I was hoping for the player character to be a little less special. Oh well. Were you wanting to be the dragonborn's errand boy?

Are you unfamiliar with the meaning of that phrase? It's not a statement of equivalence with.

That HUD definitely gets cluttered and ugly when the prompts show up. And I can now see why some people don't like the highlight. It's just awkward when he's climbing a glowing ladder.

Trying to replay New Vegas still. But I think I'm still too familiar with it, so I'm kind of bored. Fighting the urge to do a new Mass Effect 2 run. I lost my old profile, so getting the unlock powers again is tempting. Trying to wait until Arrival is released.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/03/18/elder-sc...-skyrim-preview hot

Because neither Clooney nor Kilmer started a Batman series. They both simply continued the Keaton one.

Lord of the Rings (2001) is better than Lord of the Rings (1979) Which Batman was better? Bale, Keaton, or West?

Well, what do you know. Apparently Momoa is also playing Khal Drogo in the Game of Thrones series.

I can't agree. KOTOR diverges from Star Wars on so many points that the only thing that seems to connect them are laser swords and a few visual cues. Well, that and the elements shared by most fantasy/space opera.

Especially since ME is Space Opera. And believable characters has never been a strength of that genre.

Since you're being sarcastic, then you believe they've already released Episode 3?

How? Where's episode 3? Probably waiting for sufficient inspiration. They tend to work on projects they have interesting ideas for. Episode 2 was half retreading ideas that were already tired by the time Half-Life 2 ended.

Yes, having segments of completely absent gameplay is neglecting gameplay, even if the rest of the gameplay is well done. If the player is putting his controller down, you have failed interactive media. If someone mixes completely crap character models with good character models, you call them out for it. You don't excuse mix and match. You can take that logic to some pretty ridiculous extremes-- no work of interactive media is being interactive 100% of the time. Is having a player select a dialogue response and then doing nothing while the conversation flows to the next decision point "absent gameplay"? How about the space of time between pushing the "reload" key and when the reload animation finishes? Should the game have a pong tournament going on off to the side while the player is checking the map screen? Ridiculous extremes are not an argument. Nothing works there. That's the problem with hyperbole. Graphics are important! Did you see the resolution of that loading screen, it totally sucks! This map only has two colors! I think I see a pixel on the gun! There's reasonable (is it really necessary that you give me dramatic camera angles and steal player control to introduce this boss?) and unreasonable (the player has to be mashing buttons at rapid pace constantly).

Yes, having segments of completely absent gameplay is neglecting gameplay, even if the rest of the gameplay is well done. If the player is putting his controller down, you have failed interactive media. If someone mixes completely crap character models with good character models, you call them out for it. You don't excuse mix and match.

Eh, don't complain too much about those cutscenes. 'Cause then the devs will make the cutscene long and unskippable and place it before a hard boss battle that requires a specific pattern you need to learn through trial and error. You complain about that too, then they add Quick time events! Now not only is the cutscene unskippable, but you have to tap random buttons that pop up as fast as you can, follow that by a segment of mashing a button as fast as you can giving you early carpel tunnel syndrome. Miss just one button press or you don't mash that button as furiously as you should have and start again! Plain old cutscenes aren't that bad. Why can't all game developers be like Valve?

How so? Cutscenes. It's the equivalent of splicing in segments of Atari 2800 games in the middle of Crysis. "Fudge yeah, I'm shooting all of these guys. WHEE. And now a cutscene, I'll just put my controller down and wait."

Games are a visual medium, it's ridiculous to claim that the visuals are a minor part of the experience. They're also an interactive medium. Yet sometimes have prospered neglecting that element. I'd prefer a 15 minute unskippable pong graphics sequence.

That's how you know he's a bro. He's like that one friend who's dating the psycho chick.

Nah Wynne has him beat. Okay, nicest character in the game that I didn't kill in my first playthrough.

D-bag? He was the nicest character in the game!

He's right and he's wrong. It's important to gain an audience's attention. It's not necessary for some specific individuals who make that claim. It's the distinction "graphics don't matter (to the game's success)" and "graphics don't matter (to me)."