Orogun01

Garrus does

So how do I load those up onto my 360 or PS3 again? That's what I meant by "most people don't have access to it." Origins DLC sales exceed $1 million in November 2009. Since you're talking about stuff being "more likely," I'm surprised you haven't recognized that it's more likely that a DAO player owns it for a console. Or am I just missing something? I'm sorry I though we were talking about DLC as a DRM measure, which one assumes is PC not console.

So you want to be a tool with gadgets?

So? Different rules apply to RPGs and, say Modern Warfare 2 or whatever else the kids play these days? Let's keep our expectations (borderline) realistic. Besides, I think they could have easily doubled the length of Awakening by adding some pointless filler dungeons with 3-4 types of darkspawn in the vein of the original game. I think it's much better this way, and I'm rather sorry if your immersion requires this sort of thing. They could had instead of adding dungeons just throw a few sidequest your way. The aspect of ruling was pretty much undermined they just throw a few choices your way once in a while, it's pretty much a hands-free arling. It rules itself How is not realistic to ask for expansions of the same quality as their previous works? @Thorton_AP: Check the Nexus site or the BiowareSocial, myriads of free mods. Some of them better than official DLC, and it's hurting their cause because its more likely that players that want an enhanced experience, yet have the previous experience of disappointing DLC will just download the pirated version. So the reward becomes useless.

Is 12 hours that bad? I've never understood the fixation with "time played" as the prime metric for determining quality. Unless you're just playing a game to pass the time and not to enjoy it or anything like that. Sure, 2 minutes in heaven is better than 1 minute, but I've played some games with 60-100 hours of gameplay that frankly were just time sinks when I step back and look at it. Sure, I played a lot of Oblivion, but I'd much rather play a significantly shorter game that is of actual quality. And let's not forget that the 12 hour expansion is roughly 1,5-2 times as long as the average AAA title, these days. Kind of a ludicrous thing to call out the game for. Those AAA games are not an RPG in which I want to become immersed. They had such an interesting setting and a great opportunity to mix mechanics with and economic simulation; wasted it. Most of these DLC are overshadowed by some mods out there and these are free. I expect a higher level of quality from game developers, something that will have some bearing on the game's universe not a free potato knife. Regular DRM with a great with me, these cheap gifts DLCs are hurting their own cause. When you go watch a movie or listen to music you get a whole song/movie, if a new version is made it's built upon the original and serves to enhance it. BW's DLC make the game look fragmented, they are so small that is hard to measure any contribution they make to the overall experience. Plus, a lot of these are cheap DLC are going to get pirated, because that's the only way that your Shepard is going to get his Umbra visor.

I know its an asian thing, but even so its a bit much. Doesn't explain the copycats and going postal is not just an asian thing. Walsh@: But a lot of societies have undergone rapid changes in the past and feelings of alienation, none tried to connect by copying murder. Also it's not completely random violence, the targets are children.

Do they? I think this was the point all along. Games appear to be created exclusively to entertain, which doesn't fit with other definitions of art. Art can be created solely for the purpose of entertainment. Check it

I would had agreed with you before I played DA:O and ME2. The DLC is not worth it's price, is basically the "crust" of the game all that got left out of the final cut with new makeup. The game by itself does well but there is no motivation to actually buy them. I do think that their approach is the right one, to reward honesty instead of hurting your customers because of the wrongdoers. But the quality of the content leaves much to be desired, E.G: Awakenings, an expansion that only last 12 hours Yes, but here we are talking about the DLC that you get for free with the game. Like Shale in DA:O. It's not about getting you to pay for more stuff, it's about rewarding customers instead of punishing them. So I also like this scheme very much. Shale was a punishment onto me

The problem with any kind of digital art is that it fails to fit the already existing characteristics for art. But since the definition has become wider ever since the modernist movement, games could be art if you see them that way or games, movies and music could have fallen out of the grace of the muses and into corporate limbo. A piece of art is a one of a kind item, it's unique. This was part of the original requirements for fine arts, all paintings were unique, a composition changed depending on who played it, a performance was always different, and food could not be served or prepared the same way twice. Still games bear the same purposes and motives of art, so the argument as I see it is 50-50 with personal preference tipping the scale.

I would had agreed with you before I played DA:O and ME2. The DLC is not worth it's price, is basically the "crust" of the game all that got left out of the final cut with new makeup. The game by itself does well but there is no motivation to actually buy them. I do think that their approach is the right one, to reward honesty instead of hurting your customers because of the wrongdoers. But the quality of the content leaves much to be desired, E.G: Awakenings, an expansion that only last 12 hours

What's the appeal of Sis, for that matter? She looks interesting, has a certain "taming the shrew" quality that is attractive and she won't nag or speak out of turn. Although for a character that's not all that central they sure have her in a lot of advertisements.

I don't see that as too relevant. Every other Renaissance painting is a crucifixion - without a wealth of options for interpretation. Yet only a handful of painters are considered the best, while others have faded into obscurity. The themes were similar but the execution was diverse this was always true of art. The same can be said about games, the themes and storylines repeat amongst titles but the core gameplay differs. You can have the crucifixion of Christ renaissance style and neoclassic style, the differences become evident even to the untrained eye. @Tigranes: Sorry if the tone of my post came too harsh, what I meant by it was that games are defined by gameplay. I don't mean to say that gameplay should be central but it needs to complement the script.The best of stories can be ruined by lousy controls and like I said I haven't played many games where it's obvious that story precedes gameplay. Can you recommend any?

The two development approaches, gameplay to fit story or story that fits the gameplay. Even though story is a nice plus I gotta agree with Calax, gameplay is vital if it's lacking it doesn't matter how good your story was. Games are not movies where a good story is enough to carry it on. Maybe I haven't played enough games where the story is central and the gameplay is made to fit it, since most of these attempts go with already tried methods instead of developing new mechanics that may go better with the content. BTW, after playing God Hand for the last few hours I can see why it was such a failure.

heh This **** Will **** You Up is another song of theirs that is all too easy to get stuck in your head I know. I'm listening to their whole discography right now.

I am something of an art connoisseur (A.K.A snob ) I gotta say that the definition of art is completely blurred, basically anything that appeals to emotions is art. This doesn't means that games are art, since they lack the characteristics that define art.

Well, I personally haven't played Ico, or Shadow of the colossus, but a lot of the games that get high reviews are either MASSIVE titles like Halo, GTA or Street Fighter, while games with less visibility and follow a fairly typical formula that people find fun (if a bit shallow) get relegated to average/below average scores because they "don't add anything new" to the media. My co-workers at gamestop grumbled until the sky fell that GameInformer gave White knight chronicles a 7/10 when it was obviously a good game, just because it was "standard JRPG stuff". Because of this phenomena, devs seem to throw in one useless, boring, or grindy mechanic into their games simply to say "LOOK WE TRIED SOMETHING NEW!" because EVERYTHING has to move the genre foreward. You see the same thing in movies where Things like the first Iron Man, while a good movie, was given ok reviews because "its' just a popcorn flick". Usually the reviews are made with the target audience in mind and JRPGs are kind of an exclusive club for people that kind of game. They mostly give that score to games that are well done but have little universal appeal. As for the article. That dude sure loves to hear himself talk. He criticizes Uncharted for attempts at sophistication but ask for more realism. Whatever happened to "it's just a game"? Is not just that devs try to do games that they would like to see or try at being "sophisticated". Most gamers now ask for a certain level of storytelling on their games, as he says with his Doom example. I certainly think that a level creativity is required with something like experimental games rather than commercial ones. Games that focus solely on trying new things. The problem is that games are made for commercial purposes and have very limited space to work since no ones wants to alienate consumers.

One day you I will ask you how do you know all that From what you say it seems that the same guy profiting from drug is the one establishing terrorists groups to maintain politics on his pocket. The warlords; IIRC, profited from the weapons trade. Did they exchange that for drugs? Anyway, the drug trade is to big to kill. I say go for the product, no product no problem. The aftermath is ensuring a favorable presence on the are, there is always eager to go up on the chain. It may not be moral or legal, but it's more effective to control the level of productions than to exterminate them completely since that would leave an open market for whomever comes with the next big thing.

This has been a question in my mind for a while; I'm not sure that I'll get an answer. With all the effort and manpower needed to deal drugs, how is it possible that they are able to turn a profit? Plus there is the fact that these groups are separated and were fighting amongst themselves until yesterday. It seems that what holds them together are the figureheads that financially back terrorism. If an army walks on it's stomach, starve them out. Sorry, I tend to be a little artsy with my descriptions. From what I gather from your previous 2 posts, the kind of agency cooperation required would hinder any progress. That's why I suggested a new force that is able to address the problem properly. Could be a splinter cell from one of the already existing agencies; but whose main purpose is to actively strike against terrorism. I say this because most of the counter-terrorism groups are preventive measures against terrorists attacks and are not seeking the threat out.

I also feel the MSG3 was superior. The controls on 4 are better and the weapons variety and the actual chance to use them on battle (a first on the series ) will carry you on. Plus for fans of the first game there is no greatest moment than walking on Shadow Moses again, great moment.

Welcome to the forums! Now onto business: Michael Bay sucks. He makes special effects not movies, and my nipples they hurt when I twist them.

Figures, just another reason to keep Biowarians away no account for taste. It would had completely ruined the Feng Shuei of DA:O

Even a broken clock gives the time twice a day, I imagine that some people actually have good ideas on how to fight terrorism. But most of the bills we hear are this "borderline fascist" kind. The kind of collaboration from your example, even though effective presents more legal troubles. Since it remains the problem of who enforces these policies which would require a specialized force and the fact that without a presence on the area the vacuum created would give rise to the next criminal. But I had never considered the drug war as part of the war against terrorism, heroin is big on the middle east and latin america has cocaine and marijuana. Do these actually fund terrorism or is it just average crimes?

I really hated it, all that marching, learning military tactics, and falling into formation. It really shouldn't be surprising that the State has both emasculated citizens and force unreasonable standards since Americans are living contradictions.

I found a list more akin to my taste: http://totalscifionline.com/features/3809-...t-sci-fi-movies Didn't know that they had made a Stalker movie based on the books

No sir, you have got it right. The big danger with this bill is that it will end up hurting American citizens, and the problem if a mistake like that is made in a warzone is that support from the natives will fall. That's dangerous, IMO is not only the bill but the whole American approach to terrorism that's wrong.