H

Why, I believe Obsidian have just found a proofreader.

The game has an auto-updater.

1.10, AFAIK.

The bit about Russia being full of hawt chicks is true.

Pretty close. Basically, RPGs, in my opinion, are about creating and fleshing out your character through skills selection and in-game choices. You certainly can roll a character who has nothing to do with your own personality, but players tend to gravitate towards characters who mirror their own world outlook, especially on the first playthrough. It's actually pretty tricky to give a definition to role-playing, but I hope you get the basic idea.

Moscow is mentioned in the article. Please, guys, don't portray Russia as a country where everyone wears ushanka, valenki and trench coat, plays balalaika and drinks vodka in their spare time, and where polar bears roam the streets. Really, films and games that feature Russia and are meant to be taken seriously tend to look pretty pythonesque in these parts. The bottom line: do some research and don't enforce stereotypes.

Look out behind you, xard! Look behind you!

"Exclusive" as in "until other sites copy them", I assume?

MODERATORS' TYRANNY!! THEY DON'T ALLOW YOU TO EXPRESS YOUR THOUGHTS!!1! Also, in before lock.

Uh... That would be it. Building a hybrid character who gets something from both worlds should definitely be possible. However, if a player did put all his skill points in social skills or thievery and completely ignored combat training than there is absolutely no excuse for him to whine about how his character holds a sword by the wrong end. Allocating skill points this way was his choice. He has to be a man and face the consequences. Either that, or roll a new character. It isn't, if you want the character with 0 points in combat skills to be able to survive fighting. If you have a better solution, feel free to share it with me. Fun trivia: most people think that RPG is a game where the character kills stuff, loots treasures and saves the world, and hail Oblivion as the second coming of Christ. I would be surprised if most people knew what role-playing meant. See the first bit of this post. Looks like we misunderstood each other on several points. Oh, and sorry for the late reply.

Ouch. And here we thought that through some heroic effort you managed to crush the bastards, despite having only 7 players on the team. Try to compensate for your lack of practice by, I dunno, making your writers to demoralize the enemy with witticisms next time. In soccer and war...

Well played, guys. Keep up the good work, and Obsidian will have the most feared football team in Orange County by the end of the season. Or soccer team, or whatever funny word you use for it at the other side of the ocean.

Gimble, ke ke. ^_^

I heard one of the Battlefront titles was the best-selling Star Wars game of all times. A poor Battlefield imitation managed to outsell KotORs and Jedi Knight series.

VtM: Redemption - making a Diablo clone when you have a WoD license.

I'm sorry, but if a game doesn't allow you to create a munchkin character that can do everything in a single playthrough, it's a damn good game with great replay value. Thing is, in a well-designed RPG charismatic characters simply don't need to fight. If you can get through the game using diplomacy only then what's the problem? Supporting several distinct playstyles with each of them having their own rewards and penalties doesn't strike me as poor design. So creating a tactician who relies on coordinating the actions of his followers doesn't belong in role-playing games? You seem to have a strange idea that every character should be able to kick some ass in RPGs. Well, you are wrong. The more ways there are to finish a game, the better the game is. Combat is (or should be, at least) just one of these ways, not a mandatory element that should be present in every single playthrough.

Depends on the thoroughness of the beta testers.

Earthworm Jim 2, actually. I hope Shiny will make another EWJ game someday, the first two are among the best platformers ever made.

And now for something completely different:

Most people don't buy RPGs for the dialogue and diplomacy. Still, I know several persons who choose stealth or persuasion over direct violence whenever they can. Why? There is nothing wrong with being able to play a weak character who can't hold a sword, but can talk his way out of almost any trouble or, if that fails, use his stronger and better equipped friends as protection.

19 pages of nerdraging about small deviations from the canon.