Wrath of Dagon

This just in: For every game out there, there's someone who hates it.

Wow. I think Molyneux is barely even on Vince's radar screen. Vince isn't making his game to spite Molyneux, or Bethesda for that matter, he's making a game he himself would like to play. Also, excellent post Tig, it summarizes everything nicely.

Game sounds too complicated to understand without playing the demo, also it may be good to start at the lower level and build up to the overall commander once you get the hang of it. Also I read you can build a 600 mile map and keep the forces from the previous battle, so some sort of a campaign may be possible that way. Of course the battles are so huge and high level enough they may feel like campaigns anyway. If anyone hasn't tried it, I'd also recommend Take Command 2 Manassas from MadMinute games, it's also realistic but quite a bit simpler than what I've seen of HistWar.

Developer claims it's done: http://www.joystiq.com/2009/08/17/reassuri...being-polished/

Really, what's up with that? To me, the problem with choices in ME is more than just lack of consequences. That's just a symptom of the real problem, that the choices don't flow naturally from the rest of the game, and are just inserted here and there so they can claim you're making big choices, and therefore this is a deep RPG. They're nothing more than a marketing check box. I don't include the council choice in this, it was excellently done and belongs in a much better game.

Retailers are usually the first to find out about delays. Doesn't matter too much to me, but Bioware did them a big favor by delaying DAO, and now they blow the advantage.

I don't understand your point. Because he's making his own game, he's not allowed to have an opinion of other games?

I'm 100% sure ME1 was a crap game. Also the Citadel was built by a very ancient and dangerous race, commercial land developers.

Yes, but we're kind of off topic.

There will be a full demo once the game is out, that's what I was referring to, not the combat demo, which is mostly to get feedback on the combat. And I'm not aware of anyone here saying the game will be great, all we're trying to do is explain why we have high expectations of the game.

It's not my card, it's my TV that doesn't have a digital input, since it's about 3 yrs old.

Have you ever compaired digital and analog 720p picture? Because if you have, I'm afraid there is something wrong with your eyes.. May be something's wrong with your TV. I've compared VGA and DVI on my old monitor, and didn't notice any difference.

I've already said Or what Starwars said. Some of you might think it's hype, but those of us who follow AoD forums have seen plenty of evidence, and we believe it. Most developers only give you the marketing line, ITS actually shows you how the game works. If you don't believe them, you can try the demo and see for yourself, no need to endlessly argue about this.

VGA is fine for 720P, which is what my TV is. Being a nice plasma, it still kills my 1600x1050 monitor, even with much lower res.

It's HD, but only has component or VGA. VGA is supported by my video card. If it does support the controller, I'll try it, thanks. Edit: You misread it, it says if the game supports a controller, it has to support the 360 controller, all games being able to work with controller only would be an onerous requirement.

You are aware that you can use the TV as a secondary monitor and use the 360 gamepad with the PC, right? I'm not sure if DAOPC will support the game pad, if it's not designed for it it's a pain in the ass. It might be viable if you don't have to use the KB&M at all, I'd just have to get a really long VGA cable that everyone will stumble over, so probably won't bother.

I prefer to do exploration in third person, and I like moving my character with a controller instead of using click to move. Plus it would look better on my big screen TV than on my monitor. However, combat trumps that, so I guess I'll get the PC version at least initially.

This just in, console combat has been gimped: http://daforums.bioware.com/forums/viewtop...m=135&sp=45

So they are charging the same for AoD, as others games that actually have high production values. $25 for the dl version is far more reasonable and quite frankly appropriate. Even then I only paid $19 AUD for Mount & Blade an indie title that AoD would hope to match, in both quality and success. As I've already explained, AoD is offering a lot more than just production values, things that mainstream games don't offer. If production values are the most important thing to you, buy any random EA/Activision game, don't bother with AoD. The reason the boxed version is $50 is because they want to have a really good color printed manual, which is quite expensive, especially in low volume, so they're just recovering cost.

I'm pretty sure you'll be able to turn the blood off.

I'm sure they'd love if it was that successful, they expect it to be a niche hardcore game though.

Btw, last I heard planned prices are $25 for download and $50+shipping for a box with a really nice colored manual. I suppose that could change depending on what distribution arrangements are made. You don't have to spend anything to find out if the game is worth it as there will be a demo. Also it doesn't make sense that indie games should be automatically cheaper because their budgets are less, since they also expect to sell a lot fewer games. I'm sure they've put as much time into the game per person as any mainstream developer.

I think everyone's missing the point, and it's not that expectations are lower. Indeed, why would I buy a game that I was expecting less from than most other games? The expectations are actually much higher, but these expectations are choices and consequences, different ways to play according to your build, and tactical and challenging combat. No one expects technically cutting edge graphics, because a) It's not a priority to people following this game b) There's no way to do it on a 0 budget, or even on a huge budget is forementioned priorities are also fulfilled.

I can run all my games under W7/64, some of them did crash as they did under Vista, but I think it's because my graphics card is overheating. Edit: A lot of the older game compatibility will depend on whether the graphics driver works with the game, rather than W7 itself.

If Vista was a success, and came in 64 bit only, it wouldn't be an issue right now.