Undecaf

M&MX:Legacy. After the patch the game looks and feels much better for reasons I can't really point out. I've no idea what else the patch did but the better barter screen and fixed some bugs, but it does feel better overall. Still tries to fry my GPU though.

Yeah, sure. Neither do I, personally. People need to be able to laugh at **** like that. It's just that that sort of attention stunt (picking sides and pointing fingers in a matter like that) is sure to always piss in someones face - which, I'm certain, they wouldn't really want to do. But meh.

I'm not sure if them trying to dabble with political issues of another country like that is a very good idea. Not that I'd care, but it does sound dubious.

I'm not sure that a game about a virtually empty desert world would be worth playing, or even be considered "space opera". Come on. We could build lots of sandcastles, cook humans to drink their bodily fluids spiced with spice and build more sandcastles with blue eyes. We could even have a skill for it. But seriously, I don't think you are digging deep enough here.

They are creating an interesting setup. If only the gameplay delivers; I've no idea what to expect, but hopefully something unlike Amnesia.

Tried out the open beta for Battlefield 4 since it's free and... it feels awful. Not particularly different from BF3 (which wasn't very good to begin with), it was - as usual - a confusing mess with everyone seemingly just flailing around and the usual 24/7 people buzzing around showcasing their leet killstreak skillz. Not unexpected. Not my cup of tea. Not something I'll bother with again.

It's not really something to kickstart, but if Obsidian ended up doing a "space opera", I'd love to see their take on Dune setting.

There's also the whole Mass Effect series lumped as one, and you are questioning about Witcher 2?

I don't think you have to do something totally new and never done before to have value. It'll hopefully encourage the expansion of Linux gaming, which I think can be important to the future of PC gaming. That's what it means for me. But Valve seems to have an interest in bridging PC gaming with the living room. At the very least, getting people to realize they can hook up their PCs to televisions. The controller design seems to be an attempt to advance controllers. We'll have to see if it works out or not, it's too beyond the norm for me to judge without testing. True, not everything needs to be something never before seen. The question just came up after seeing arguments how this is just a blatant middlehand cash grab.

I've probably missed something down the line because I haven't really followed the topic all that intensely, but what's really the point with all this? A machine to stream games to a TV from your computer through Steam, and a controller. People can already hook their rigs on their TV's and use controllers. What's the real catch here? What did I miss?

20 hours 34 minutes (and counting)?

I have no particular interests in a "space opera" game, especially of the Mass Effect or SW kind; so while I would want to support Obsidian, they'd need to do something really spectacular with the setup and gameplay to get my money. I hope they don't do it, but instead - if ever Kickstarting a new IP again, or even getting publisher backing for such - something completely different from that (or a swords&sorcery setup).

Rerun for San Andreas since I can't play GTA V at home. My god the opening is boring... and I dread the idea of the gangwars and airplane "license" tedium to come. Otherwise I have pretty fond memories to revisit (or perhaps it's just nostalgia kicking in).

Valve up to something with Steam. Announcement 1/3 in a few hours.

It sure works, no question about it. And good for Rockstar. It is kind of tragicomic to read the journos making clowns out of themselves (yet again). So I guess it's a plus that way too.

One has to wonder how much all this brown nosing has cost Take Two. These aren't even reviews anymore. The game is really fun, to be sure (from what I've played), but it's nowhere near warranting all the verbal fellatio it gets.

What ever their new game is, I do hope the setting won't be typical swords&socery or space fantasy. Those tend to be worn out and difficult to come with anything really interesting anymore.

That was the only feature I saw any possible intrigue in while the rest looks pretty standard fare and kinda underwhelming. But yeah, if I get it, it will be from the bargain bin for me too. it's weird, because if Rockstar had said "when you start a new game you get to choose from 3 characters, each has their own unique skills and strengths!" i would have been excited. But instead its: "we made a super long movie with three characters in it, and when its time for the movie to change scenes, you will begin controlling whichever character that scene is about." frankly, other than the last 30 minutes of RDR, i don't think rockstar is as good at making movies as they think they are. so playing a twenty+ hour movie about three old retired gangsters sounds very different from my idea of a good time. Yeah, I can see it getting old really fast. I've not really followed the game so I don't have much to go on but a recollection of switching between characters somewhat freely in and out of missions, and the possibilities that sort of gameplay and storytelling would offer. But meh, if there is no PC version as mentioned above, the game is ruled out completely from me (I thought there were plans for a PC version, but I guess I misrecalled or misinterpreted something). Not a big loss.

That was the only feature I saw any possible intrigue in while the rest looks pretty standard fare and kinda underwhelming. But yeah, if I get it, it will be from the bargain bin for me too.

Oh my god, the delivering of that line almost broke my jaw.

Well, that's how games are generally graded, aren't they? It's not like they have to follow the normal distribution or something.They are, almost everywhere. It just never struck as sensible to me to have a scale from 1 to 10 and have "average" at 7 to 8. I've never seen a 1, 2 or 3. 8 was slightly above average, so average would be 6-7, right? I've seen 2/10 scores. It's not an issue worth of debate, and people are obviously used to it. But it looks disfigured in my eyes, and always has.

Well, that's how games are generally graded, aren't they? It's not like they have to follow the normal distribution or something. They are, almost everywhere. It just never struck as sensible to me to have a scale from 1 to 10 and have "average" at 7 to 8.

Well it's an opinion, but it's not like anyone cares. Sure. Was just wondering...

8 being "slightly above average"? On topic... At chapter 2 in The Walking Dead. The "gameplay", if you can call it that, leaves a lot to hope for even for a point'n click adventure, but story and its flow are very satisfying so far. I'd be keen to see what kind of an RPG Obsidian could craft from this base if ever given the job.

It does. And I find it a bit worrisome, as it sounds almost overwhelmingly so. How much will it interfere with regular game flow with all these random events and management issues? How often does it prompt me to get there in the middle of quest or when I'm half a continent away and going the opposite direction to do something that's seemingly important? The feature in isolation sounds very neat, but how much and how often is the player randomly prompted to switch adventuring to sim-castle-tycoon?