Tagaziel

Also. Can CD Projekt just cut the crap and state that Cirilla is coming back?

At this point I'm so used to driving with keyboard keys and taking turns with handbrakes that I'm not sure I'd be able to adapt to a mouse-controlled method of driving. Couldn't really do that in Arma or OFP, come to think of it.

'xactly. Been the point all the time.

Just so you know: failed attempts at sarcasm are not a good substitute for intelligence either.

Not really, no. Depends entirely on your preference, as you point. It's not a fact that a controller is better. So I guess hundreds of platformers released for the PC before modern console controllers were developed are abysmal, unergonomic pieces of ****? Good to know. Also, argumentum ad populum is bad. You should feel bad for using it. So, my opinion is bad, your opinion is fact? Coolio.

No, it works better with a steering wheel, gear box, and pedals. Can't say anything about Sleeping Dogs, but I've played both Arkham titles on mouseyboard and never had any problems. The precision of camera movements was pretty damn handy. The long, long, long history of platformers on the PC shows that a mouseyboard has no problems with platformers. A joystick is not a console controller (I don't recall a joystick being one of the factory-default pripherals for any of the current generation consoles), so the point is moot. And how does that make the mouseyboard any worse? Fast and precise camera control, robust key mapping on both the keyboard and the mouse, and an ergonomic layout. Who can want more? Third person action RPGs have a long history on the PC platform as well. The controller didn't revolutionize anything, nor is it intrinsically better suited for these kinds of games.

If a game works good with a controller, it's going to work better with the much more precise and responsive mouseyboard.

I like it. More colours, more variety, less diluted diarrhea colour palette.

I might be late to comment, but I'll just point out that this is a non-issue. Situations like this plague modern languages. Did you know that the Polish word for cat (kot) is German for **** (Kot)?

If I'm not mistaken, this scenario is similar to how the legacy of Rome played out: while some technologies continued to impress centuries later, in many aspect succeeding cultures and states surpassed the failed (Western) Empire. It's a refreshing approach, to say the least. It might fall outside the design scope, but what about law? Roman law, despite being over two millenia old (if you start counting from the Law of the Twelve Tablets), still continues to influence our culture, our lawmaking, and, at least in continental Europe, continues to be a part of the curriculum for law studies (which, admittedly, I graduated). Would the laws of Eir Glanfath have a similar impact, assuming they'd be sufficiently advanced? Would there be a Iustinian to gather the law and form a codex? The glossators, commentators, mos italicus, mos gallicus--- oh damn, I'm rambling again. It's just that many, many games completely ignore how profound an impact law has on life. I recall very few games where law played an important role in the setting and was relevant to the game (off the top of my head: Morrowind and the special status the island enjoyed). Don'tmindmejustalawgradramblingon

I like the look of the animats. Is it me, or is Eternity going to play around with the FORGOTTEN ADVANCED CIVILIZATION trope as well? The inclusion of copper armour and designs that look and feel dated is a pretty awesome turn away from the usual LOOK AT HOW ADVANCED THESE ELVES WERE approach most fantasy games have. I also dig the colour palette the more I look at it.

After Master of Orion III and the removal of Mrrshan I've given up hope.

That issue stems from the fact that the base game is all about unpredictable, non-linear gameplay. Paradox tried linear games before, Europa Universalis 2 being an example, but the system was screwed up. Oh, you have a +3 stability Poland with maxed out sliders guaranteeing a very progressive state that doesn't repeat the mistakes of real history? Well, **** you, you're getting those terrible events either way. At least the game didn't partition Poland automatically on 1772. Maybe the fact that I unleashed hell on Russia, occupied Moscow and generally been very nasty towards them when diplomacy failed.

It's a factor of the learning curve, not the game's bugginess. I've invested some 80 hours in the game and I still find new features and doodads.

Actually, the existence of alien life is a perfectly falsifiable thesis. It poses a question with a binary answer, answer that will eventually emerge. It can be proven, but we lack the technology to do it, yet. Religion, on the other hand, is fundamentally unscientific and irrational, so it cannot be compared.

Ha! Didn't know that. Will sure come in useful the next time I'm working sieges.

Is it better than the gunplay in my beloved Far Cry 2?

Which makes them juicy sources of revenue.

Actually, I did. One of my exercises for the megagame ended in a huge defeat, as the Mongols invaded the Kingdom of Ruthenia while my armies were engaged in France, helping the ruler resolve a succession crisis in return for their aid. I couldn't get back fast enough and the Mongols reached 100% in a very short amount of time. Of course, I learned my lesson and used that strategy against my enemies down the road (reading Clausewitz helped too). I'm not sure, but I don't think I noticed the effects you mention in CK1. Plagues and province status were a minor nuisance in CK1, since with SuperBaby UltraSteward you were swimming in cash and could afford pretty much any army and improvement (seriously, by 1215 as Kingdom of Poland I have some 15,000 gold and a monthly surplus between 200 and 400). You're making out CK1 to be some kind of grand, in-depth simulation, when it's actually a good game, but boiling down to one point: have money for war. In CK2 the focus is different. Having money for war is important as well (otherwise you have to deal with mercenaries turning on you, heavy morale penalties, disbanding troops), but the game's overall focus switches to maintaining vassal loyalty, including limiting the amount of time their levies are raised. In CK1 it's simple: raise vassal levy, send him money to get loyalty 100, case closed. In CK2, the negative relations modifier persists until it naturally decays and can go as as -99. Which, in turn, may come to bite you in the ass when that King whose 25,000+ levy joins a faction and presents you an ultimatum just as you are narrowly beating back the Mongol invasion or the Holy Roman Empire that really wants your county. On the other counts, I noticed that plagues and characters do have an effect on military performance. Tailoring leaders (traits, specifically) and placing them on the correct flanks is essential, as is using the terrain to your advantage, and avoiding diseased regions like the, well, plague, as attrition skyrockets. I don't recall there ever being a penalty for forcing amphibious landings in CK1 or crossing rivers. Meanwhile, I used rivers more than once to defeat a superior enemy force and push them back. I found it extremely useful for keeping the Ilkhanate in check (succession crises are oh-so-fun when you're not on the receiving end). I don't really notice the randomness in the plots, though maybe that's because I'm at medium crown authority and the vassals can wage their wars. Leads to pretty spectacular rises to power, to be honest. Oh. I do believe you can imprison them for acting dishonorably, assassinating them on their own, or excommunicating and then imprisoning. The game's system is decent, but in your example it clearly comes short of reaching its goal. Then again, how often do you get courtiers who murder kings? The advantage is a historical thing. Few could hold their own against an Empire. About badboy and realm duress: the former is easily managed by vassalizing people and recognizing claims (cheap way to get free vassals) in CK1, the latter seems pretty random. Oh, have one disgruntled count in an obscure part of your vast empire? REALM DURESS, REALM DURESS, ENJOY YOUR POX. The faction system that replaced realm duress is better in my opinion. You can actually manage problems, instead of being at the mercy of the unholy RNG. Didn't history prove that reliable?

I don't see how CK1 is mechanically superior to CK2. For instance, wars in CK1 were more primitive. Fixed siege lengths, ability to instagrab land (park your 20,000 army on top of a county and go wild), strange war resolution mechanics, simplistic battle resolution and more. Sure, losing stacks was a bigger penalty, but the game didn't have CK2's war score mechanic. Which is an improvement in every way, as it introduces a lot more consequence to your strategy and makes it possible to lose a war through inaction. Then there's the phenomenal intrigue, which was practically non-existent in CK1. I'm not sure why you're railing that imprisoning and executing people that don't like you is in accordance with the reality of medieval times. It isn't. The ruler and nobility always existed in a state of uneasy balance; tyrannical actions could and did trigger a crisis. For example, Bolesław the Bold, Polish King of the 11th century, was forced to flee the country after he sentenced a traitorous bishop to death. The sentence was carried out and the nobility rebelled. Besides, I've been able to stretch the Kingdom of Poland from Baltic to the Mediterranean by gobbling up the lands of the Byzantine Empire, Seljuk Turks, Cuman tribes, all before 1215. That's impossible in CK2 as you just get your ass handed to you.

In what way is CK2 more shallow? My impression is the other way round (I played CK1 extensively right before switching to CK2). No intrigue mechanics, a hilarious claim system, extremely easy power gaming... CK2 is an improvement in every aspect. So, basically, CK1?

I picture a team of adventurers with priceless, yet water-sensitive artefacts travelling to a city. Then Clumsy Joe slips on the crossing and pulls everyone into the water. Cue wrath.

Neverwinter Nights 2 and Far Cry 2. Need a break from the other games. The former for OBSIDIAN STUFFS, the latter for its wonderful gun play.

Stop making me want to buy the Old Gods!

Obsidian should take as much time as they need. The only reason KOTOR2 and New Vegas had problems was because of the limited time frame. Give them time. Let's see them at work.