Aristes

I'm about to fix the power plant in Gecko. Fun times.

I will admit that I laughed out loud. ...But, you know, we could be the salvation of Fallout: New Vegas! I'm at Gecko in a Fallout 2 run right now. I'll start taking notes just in case the dev team hasn't played the game yet.

Where have you read this? Last time I checked Blizzard said multiplayer can only be played on Battle.net. Then again, I haven't been following the issue for about two months now, so it could have changed, but can you link me to the source? Thanks! That's not a done deal. ...And since it was short and only to correct me, Purkake's response to my post doesn't count. http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/60156 There's the link above. I don't know if we can count that as LAN. I'm thinking a game where can play independent of an internet connection. *shrug* Actually my point was only that it wouldn't matter. Even if we all share a T1 connection, we'll be just fine. The big thing is being able to have a private room for five or six people.

I agree. An insta-kill trick for the retarded. For whom is VATS broken, though? I mean, if we polled the players, would most of them say they did or did not like VATS? Hell, my favorite aspect to target is the skill point pool, and I figure that it's 'broken,' but I don't think I've ever exactly put it that way. VATS is what VATS is. If folks use it as a win-button, fine. I don't think they will remove it, and they could very well leave it as it is. For my own part, I dislike the way it functions rather than its effect. I don't care if it makes the game easier. I'll be interested to see what happens. Will Obsidian go the Olympus Mons route and satisfy the players in the ivory tower or leave it as is for the hoi polloi?

No offense, alan, but you don't scare me. Anyhow, I wasn't ranting. I was merely commenting on how Diablo changed from Diablo 2, but I still found it quite fun. ...And I was also commenting on how game design tends to favor multiplayer sometimes even if the publisher or developer think the game will primarily be a single player platform. Moreover, Krezak, if you didn't find anything worth reading in my previous post, it was pretty pointless to respond to it in the first place. Just an observation.

As I recall, Bliz said that they expected the majority of players to play the game in single player mode but that the multiplayer crowd was generating most of the buzz. I might be wrong. I mean, no one go gonzo because I said that. I'm either right or wrong, but drawing your six shooter and going message board cowboy on me doesn't really change much. I played hours and hours of Diablo with friends. I played a lot of Diablo 2 with friends, but not nearly so much. It's just ironic that I played more of the game that was ostensibly more heavily invested in single player with friends and spent way more hours playing Diablo 2 single player when it was clearly crafted to keep the mulitplayer crowd happy. Go figure. Hell, I even think a lot of folks play MMORPG alone, which is to say the majority of the time they're not grouped. I know I used to play the game that way a lot. I don't know how many, and probably not the majority, but I'm sure there is still a group who play the game single player. I think Bliz designed the game as multiplayer, but made enough concessions to the single player crowd to keep it fun for everyone. I was rather offput by the lack of save in D2, but otherwise the game rocked. Both are great games and I don't care what the bent is for Diablo 3 as long as I don't have to count on my friends losing interest in their other multiplayer game interests.

A new Wolfenstein game? Huzzah!

I wonder, was VATS was a successful design decision in that it was popular with the players? Not having an ax to grind, that's a legit question and not a lead in to some snarky comment about FO3. If other players really dug VATS, then the design team would have to be at least somewhat careful about what they do to change it. If the bulk of FO fans loved the exploration and setting and VATS was only a small part of that experience, then I think the design team has a lot of room to maneuver. Frankly, I would use VATS a lot more often if some of the changes that CG offers were included. Even with the choice to make it so that every time I used VATS it didn't go super slo mo would make me happy. I don't mind it slowing somewhat. That's probably useful for a player who will be out of VATS at the end of the round or whatever. ...But the super slowmo followed by gratuitous gore that wastes even more time just drives me bonkers. Added functions in VATS would be cool too, I suppose, although the idea behind VATS, that it catches some of the turn based feel of FO1/2, just never hit home for me. Oh, and regardless of how many other folks hated it, I loved the radio. Only when I was sneaking did I turn off the radio. I thought some of the DJ chatter was actually well done, but the music is a must. There's something about having a well selected set of tunes that really enhances the gameplay for me. Hell, I even bought that Bingo Bango Bongo song by Danny Kaye and the Andrews Sisters.

I doubt I play the game on HC mode. Then again, I doubt if I play the game with anyone other than friends while sitting in the same room. Yeah yeah, I know. I won't be able to lan it so we'll be playing on a shared internet connection, no biggie. There's some chance that I won't bother playing it with friends at all, since most of my friends are so invested in WoW that there's small chance of getting them to go to D3. I'll probably just play D3 as a single player game and I, while I think hardcore mode could have its fun moments, it doesn't sound appealing to me as a single player option.

hahaha Anyhow, I wish I could work the controler to save my backside, but I can't. So, no 360 or PS3 for me. I already have a blu ray disk. I don't have time to play the games I already own for the PC. I refuse to have another piece of equipment in my house that I don't use regularly. I remember five years ago one of my friends telling me that we'd only have one system within five years that would be like all the available consoles, the PC, and a home theater system put together and that our conventional PCs would be gone. I figure that's going to happen within the next five years. Looks like this thread has officially morphed, huh?

That's funny. I like that. BTW: I'm this interested just from reading the stuff folks put in here without even so much as looking past spoiler tags. I haven't followed a single link out of this thread. I've just been following the thread. Pretty good work if you ask me.

Naw, we do all the lowbie stuff at level these days. We have the In the Name of the Light quest. Sadly, I didn't have time to do anything other than the library, but that was fun. We didn't get my sister, but four people is plenty good enough for that quest. Is it me or have they really made these instances easier, and I don't just mean the level?

New, for those gamers who like living on the edge! You don't want a pansy assed game, you say? The new DeathCore setting on Diablo 3. If your one character dies, the game is wiped off the harddrive, you computer explodes, your family disowns you, and a hand pops out of the game box and shoots you between the eyes with a .45! No more pansy gaming for you! heh heh Just joshin'. Anyhow, I don't care about bragging rights but I invariably play a game on the hardest setting if the other settings get to be too easy that I don't find them fun or there's content I can unlock by playing the hardest levels. I never feel like I've ever really achieved the ending if I didn't get there through gameplay. I think MMOPRGs are a pain in the ass for PvP already. I've gotten my kills and whatnot, but it isn't my thing. Once I'd played a few hundred battleground and gotten a few thousand kills, it just stopped being fun at all. I have, however, played some of my characters hardcore on PvE. You know what it's like to get to level 48 before your first death. :'(. lol

I thought he was making fun of Pidesco. Anyhow, there are still plenty of academes who refuse to consider The Lord of the Rings set as literature. I'm not exactly accusing Pidesco of being a snob, but there clearly is a bit of snobbery going around. After all, Beowulf fails in quite a few areas in comparison to other literary titles, and yet it's a classic. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest strikes me as rather lackluster, but it has had real durability. I think downplaying the achievements of previous games because of the potential you see in the medium is on the short rather than far sighted end of things.

You are an absolute doofus. Come to think of it, I was unlcear as to which one of you I meant. The answer is, yes. I'm talking to you.

I promised my brother, wife, and friend that we could do Scarlet Monestary tonight. Ugh. My sleep schedule is still kaput. Anyhow, we'll rope my sister into it and then have a party of five, although I think we could 4man it no prob.

DEATH be not proud, though some have called thee Mighty and dreadfull, for, thou art not so, For, those, whom thou think'st, thou dost overthrow, Die not, poore death, nor yet canst thou kill me. From rest and sleepe, which but thy pictures bee, Much pleasure, then from thee, much more must flow, And soonest our best men with thee doe goe, Rest of their bones, and soules deliverie. Thou art slave to Fate, Chance, kings, and desperate men, And dost with poyson, warre, and sicknesse dwell, And poppie, or charmes can make us sleepe as well, And better then thy stroake; why swell'st thou then; One short sleepe past, wee wake eternally, And death shall be no more; death, thou shalt die. Donne

hahaha French wine swilling idiots. You have some great one liners.

I'm seriously starting to jones for this game. Damn it, where is Alpha Protocol. What's sad is, I haven't had time to play some of the games I have already. I can spend ten to fifteen minutes here and see all this game info and it makes me want the game, but I don't have two or three hours at one time to play it anyhow. ho hum Still, great work, Maria. Bio is very lucky to have someone like you keeping up the excitement for the title.

No, but there should be some account for purpose. Within the confines of game design, there is some restriction on the writer's prerogative. Add to that the fact that the games are far more interactive than movies, novels, or music, which the writer must take into account.

Hey, Torment had some spots of great writing. So did Grim Fandango. However, games will always be games and the design team must sacrifice something in order to make it a game. That and both games had less stellar moments also. Still, there were outstanding moments in both games and several others. The cutscenes in Brutal Legend look quite good.

I never even played a melee character. I didn't think the game was too terribly hard as non-melee, but I guess it would have been even easier as a knuckle-dragging bruiser. Unfortunately, I like my characters more of the fast talking sharp shooting type. ...And that's what I generally build. I try different things from time to time, but I like ranged folks in my Fallout games. (and mages otherwise ) If melee has that much of an advantage over a ranged build, I think it's a design flaw. That's like saying that we shouldn't train soldiers in small arms or heavy weapons but simply equip them with louisville sluggers and have them run at the enemy. I dunno. I managed to circle around stuff that got in close on me and shoot it to death well enough. On the other hand, it's a design decision that doesn't take anything away from me personally. The only way to know that melee is so much more overpowered than ranged is to play melee and find out. Since I hate VATS and I prefer to kill the enemy at a distance, I use the best/funnest gun lying around. As far as skill points go, I think I'd rather see raising the cap than lowering the points. Even without bobble heads, you still have books and perks. You can reduce the skill point pool per level, but that just makes books and perks more valuable. I don't know if the skill max should be set the same as FO2 or not, but something to spread out those points more and adds more variety to the game. Of course, that figures that the game takes advantage of the whole spread. Otherwise, why bother? Anyhow, I think, when it comes to skill max on one hand and skill allotment on the other, a little higher sounds better than a little less.

I played a lot of farmville yesterday afternoon and evening. They had a special event that let me plant superberries. I had almost 900million coins before I bought a greenhouse and a farmhouse. I get such joy from my little farm. happy happy joy joy Sorry about the AP, bro. I guess that was an inappropriate place to sing a happy tune.

Yay! Worgen! I might buy the expansion.

I'm going to reread the last couple of pages. I understand now that you're not picking a fight, but I think I might not have understood previous points. I would have to say that my essential position, regardless of where anyone else stands, is that energy weapons as a separate category doesn't make much sense to me. For all I care, firearms and energy could be one large category and specialization in individual weapons would be perfectly reasonable, as per DnD. I don't think that energy weapons should be a category separate from pistols or firearms. I've never thought so. Even in Fallout, when I first played it years ago, I thought it was strange that I had such a hard time learning how to use a laser pistol compared to a 10mm. While the care is different, you still point and shoot. From experience, I know that I had virtually no problem switching between a .22 and a .45, which simply cannot be any less different in execution than a 10mm and a laser pistol in terms of actual operation. I've heard all sorts of excuses as to why energy weapons required a separate category. Once again, I can shoot an M16 and a 12 gauge at about equal proficiency. That might not be saying much, but the operation is by and large the same. Perhaps I won't win an olympics, but I can basically get bullets in the area I want. Sure, care and mantainance might be different, but they are essentially the same in use. I guess I do disagree in a couple of areas that I can identify right away. If concealment and ability to draw quickly were factors, I think pistols would have to win hands down. I never really had the opportunity to test how fast I could draw a pistol as opposed to unsling a rifle and draw a bead on a target. It's been years since I've even held a firearm. Still, I'm almost certain I could draw faster than I could bring a rifle to bear unless I had the rifle in my hands already. Neither are important unless the PC is forced to conceal his weapons for some reason or another. In which case the pistol or small melee weapon would be an advantage and the unarmed character would have the best time of it. Without that design, there's really no consideration for any weapon other than proficiency, damage, range, and personal preference. Anyhow, like I said, I was getting pretty irritated and it seems without warrant. Not much of a surprise. Time to go peruse the old thread and see what I got mixed up.