WorstUsernameEver

I always try to put things in context and I'm also partial against blatant clickbait misrepresentations of an opinion, yeah. And I wasn't attributing that to you, by the way, but to OXM.

Please quote the guy instead of the article title. He's referencing budget and manpower, not the graphical output itself.

Out of curiosity, how would people feel if they dropped the Torment name and simply referenced it in the Kickstarter?

What !!! Thats scientifically impossible, Hurlshot its been proven on this thread that you cannot like all the Fallout games. I think you are just being agreeable. And thats completely unnecessary. Please reword your post with how you really feel Now you're just making up things.

If you think being funny will lead Volourn to forgive you know that it won't. Also know that it is spelled sozzy not "Soz-ey", r00fles!

There are more mission types and some minigames, and the story missions shake up things a bit, but if you don't enjoy the core shooting gameplay you'll probably keep finding the game repetitive. Personally, while the single mission types could have used more variation, I feel like the game is really smart in offering you enough activities and tools that you keep jumping from one to another, and every single one of them is at the very least enjoyable. The story sickens me, though.

You initially seemed to take issue at my explanation of why people wanted it to bomb and later took issue at the fact that I called the game competent, so I answered to that. I never argued that some of the vitriolic tones against Ninja Theory weren't out of line.

Sure. Doesn't change the fact that the ranking system is broken and the developers fundamentally don't understand the purpose it served (otherwise they wouldn't have redesigned it this way), that the game runs at 30 fps, that the game is generally easier and more forgiving in terms of combo execution, etc. Again, I have no problem with people enjoying the game, but come on, you seriously don't understand why people don't like it?

I wouldn't call Taneem all of Ninja Theory. I wouldn't call Chris Avellone all of Obsidian, but when he makes statements for a game, people will more or less take them as something "Obsidian" said. For that matter, though, the same kind of attitude has more or less been present in all the press outings of the title, even the ones from CAPCOM and not Ninja Theory. Granted, if the PR was obnoxious as hell but the game great it wouldn't matter much. But the game.. isn't great. It's competent. * * Based on what I've played and seen at least. I haven't played the complete game, so there might be some brilliant sections later on.

I hope it bombs. Why do you want it to bomb? Probably because Ninja Theory has been insufferable and pretentious for all development and the game hasn't been developed in-house. Going from the demo and the streams, it seems like an okay action game with a story that takes itself way too seriously despite being just as bad as the first 3 games, and some really impressive art here and there (though monster and character designs are kinda so-so imo). I'll probably grab it at a Steam sale.

Not really. It would be more akin to a TES fan saying he or she doesn't want to play another game in the series because it's a turn-based title. Or an MMO. And actually, turns out I've seen it happen!

Are you telling me you didn't enjoy Fallout 3 or Fallout New Vegas? Seriously now What's so weird about not enjoying those games? I liked them, but there certainly are plenty of arguments to be made against them.

I just hope that if someone do they'll grab Vigil with it. Darksiders II has plenty of problems, but I thought it was an improvement from the original and had more of an identity, and with a bit of guidance from veteran developers, a third game could develop into something really impressive.

I'm fairly sure the bulletpoint stuff was taken from a Reddit thread. Dunno where the Obsidian stuff comes from, though C2B already mentioned Ferret Badouin which I guess lends +0.5 credibility to it.

Glowing compass?

No, Dragon's Dogma is great fun and absolutely recommended. It's a pity it never got a PC version though, both console versions struggle in terms of framerate and level of detail shown.

You're working on it, or are you on the other title? Assuming you're not under the threat of Polish NDAs. Also the trailer looks good, although the most interesting part is the hidden message: game currently scheduled for 2015, although it's really only a "when it's done" deal, and it was announced so early to build up the team. CDPR also sent out moar info on Cyberpunk 2077 that I don't see posted here.

But I burnt him down. Bethesda: "No, you didn't" So, uhm, par of the course for the Fallout setting? It's not like importing saves has ever been a thing with Fallout, after all, canonical endings were always decided by the devs.

I get it, there are economic realities that they have to deal with. Same with the Torment license, which is obviously more or less a PR stunt to raise awareness. Still, not good for the people who are supposed to pay, IMO.

I haven't been following D&D for a while (been playing Pathfinder for a bit with my group before we disbanded) but.. they did? Dragonlance was pretty popular last time I checked, and it's not like they had any problem keeping more than one traditional fantasy setting, given that they also kept pushing Greyhawk with 3/3.5.

Explain to me how this improves on the Real Time with Pause paradigm because I don't see it. In fact, the fact that combat *always* goes on no matter what and you can't queue orders while in pause means that the flow of the combat would move to something more RTS/MOBA-like and away from the Infinity Engine experience. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's clearly not what was promised to the backers and not the experience they handed out money for.

I'm intrigued, but frankly I'm against them starting a Kickstarter before Wasteland 2 is done. Prove you can once before trying to get my money again, please?

Of course it does, because it means losing variety in design, and personally I don't think that's worth it, even if we potentially got dozens of worthy open-world games. If "open world" is the problem, then I present you another example: the abundance of third-person shooter mechanics that became common in all kinds of genre. Sure, plenty of those games *were* worth it and fun, but is it really a good thing that now even Tomb Raider is essentially an Uncharted clone?

Company of Heroes?

Nothing per se, but of a series that wasn't open world moves to that kind of design simply because it's perceived to be more popular (which Alan has confirmed not to be the case for DAIII) there is plenty of wrong. Is that a trend? Mmh, I'd have to think about it, but it seems to me that it is, given the recent popularity of open-world titles, and we've already seen some developers shifting to open-world or marketing titles as open-world/sandboxy.