Nemo0071
-
Posts
236 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Nemo0071
-
-
I hope those Robot thingies in FO:NV will be voiced by the person that did the Mr Gutsy's. Those things were hilarious.
I came across Sergeant RL-3 all the way near Republic of Dave once. No idea how the bugger even managed to get there.
Mr. Gutsy robots? Harold? Garrett? Win. He had a monotone but also deep & cool voice in Thief games.
My point still stands about voice actors' job being easier while working on different "types" of characters. This guy also made the human/mutant/robot thing.
-
I mean, I'm no expert but if they do VO for multiple characters, and use the exact same voice (their "default" voice, if you will) for all of them, can we still call them voice actors (i.e. are they really earning their pay)?
Maybe they should speak with a fake Italian or French accent, huh?
Maybe.
This guy is my personal favorite, and I was mostly thinking about these characters when I said "the exact same voice":
Craig Sechler: Butch DeLoria / Harkness / Billy Creel / Crazy Wolfgang / Sticky / Andy Stahl / Sergeant Bejamin Montgomery (Operation Anchorage) / Male Talon Company merceneries (Dunmer/Bosmer/Altmer in Oblivion)Possible reasons for why these characters stood out:
1-) Some of them were in the same general area (Billy, Andy - Megaton).
2-) You heard some of them frequently (TC mercs - Randomly Spawned Bad Guys, Crazy Wolfgang - Merchant, Butch - Companion).
3-) They were all humans.
Or androids.
4-) All of the above (talking to Crazy Wolfgang at Megaton with Butch on your side. Bring along Sticky to tell his stupid stories in the background and I should definitely try this sometime...
).Wes Johnson: Mr. Burke / Fawkes / Uncle Leo / Scribe Bigsley / Super Mutants / Protectron / Sentry Bot / Tracker Yokels - Point LookoutSee? Humans, mutants, robots... But this one might also actually be a good VA if he really managed to pull off what Slowtrain said. That was priceless.
-
Yeah the same couple of monotone people who do the voices for most of the generic characters. At least change their accent to make it sound like character A was not voiced by the same person who voiced character B.
This always bugged me. I mean, I'm no expert but if they do VO for multiple characters, and use the exact same voice (their "default" voice, if you will) for all of them, can we still call them voice actors (i.e. are they really earning their pay)?
-
Thanks for the answers. From what I understand if things stay the same way when the game comes to PCs, I'll be riding horses for a looong time in this game. Both for the sake of saving and not fast traveling...
If you're outside a town or gang hideout you can set up a campsite and save / change outfits / what have you. It's also how you fast-travel.Camping for saving makes sense, I hope they can make it smoother for the PC version.
So, how does the fast travel actually work? Do we travel between previous campsites or something? Sounds kinda like "marking your territory".
So how long before the pc port version comes out do you think?Lets lay odds... 6 months? 1 year? 18 months? 2 years? more?
Considering how this is Rockstar's new "big thing" after GTA games, I'd expect the same formula, even the same timeline.
I'd say 8 months, give or take 2.
-
All this glitch & ambush & death talk reminds me:
How are the saves handled? I'm guessing the "go to your house & sleep to save the game" method won't work in an open environment. I even have my reservations about autosaving only when you finish a particular objective (for all I know it could take about half an hour to finish, say, a bounty hunter mission).
-
Could be about Turkey and the Balkans. It was the year Austria annexed Bosnia and Hercegovina and the Young Turks rose to power in Turkey offering to ally Turkey with Britain, but Churchill turned them down (anyone spot the irony in that?)
Kind of...
-
But Nemo, to do creative problem solving based on a small set of skills you'd need some kind of insanely clever general theory of systems capable of that degree of logical abstraction.
Which I believe that you believe is not present / possible in computer games, at least in F:NV.
No comment, then.
-
I'd still say WWI, but that bit about "no gunpowder" is confusing...
If the counter is constantly moving backwards, my money's on Rome.
-
Just to be fair, there were traps that needed Explosives skill. Many traps. Actually FO3 traps followed a simple pattern: If it's a mechanical trap, you need Repair; if it's explosive based, you need Explosives. Not only it made perfect sense in the game (even in reality) it also gave you alternative solutions to problems (got repair? lose the trapwire. got explosives? snatch the grenade bouquet instead. etc.).
That's true. I was thinking about the non-explosive traps when I wrote that.
But doesn't it make matters worse then? Having 2 skills that perform the same function?
I thought having different solutions to some (if not all) puzzles / challanges in a game (possibly with a solution that your character build allows) was a core principle in RPGs. I could be wrong though.
For example, in the tripwire scenario, you can just run through the trap quickly and take a bit of blast damage (Endurance), jump over it (Agility; well, it did affect your speed), throw an object to it from afar to trigger it (Intelligence; YOUR intelligence, not the PC's
) etc. They're all viable solutions for that given trap that perform the same function (getting through the trap) through different means (taking advantage of different skills/stats).There's no right answers here, of course, just possiblities, but I think working through a game's skill lists and tightening things up makes for ultimately a stronger gameAnd again, I'm not trying to say that crpgs should be forced to have extremely limited skill lists neccessarily, but rather that the skills just be very definitely DIFFERENT skills rather than several variations on a particular "flavor" of skill.
Again, agreed on that.
-
I would say you keep it simple enough that each skill has an obvious use that is plainly different from other skills and has worthwhile in-game use.
No argument there. I meant that I believe Science and Repair meet this requirement, they just need a bit more content.
Why is disarming traps in FO3 repair and not science or perhaps explosives or even lockpicking? It seems a very arbitrary choice and when something gets that arbitrary I think its time to go back and review the skill list again because you're doing something wrong.Just to be fair, there were traps that needed Explosives skill. Many traps. Actually FO3 traps followed a simple pattern: If it's a mechanical trap, you need Repair; if it's explosive based, you need Explosives. Not only it made perfect sense in the game (even in reality) it also gave you alternative solutions to problems (got repair? lose the trapwire. got explosives? snatch the grenade bouquet instead. etc.).
edit: And if "making sense" isn't enough, the game gives you information on exactly which skill check you just passed/failed, iirc.
-
Repair is already a vital skill for firearms-orientated characters though, while science isn't necessarily so, and could be actually linked to crafting (I believe it worked like that in Van Buren) and a host of other things.
So I'd prefer if they kept both skills, not because we have AWESUM MOAR SKILLZ!11!!ONE but because they could expanded into two rather different and equally important gameplay elements that do not overlap.
Yep, as long as the skills are each useful in their own right, then it's fine.
I would argue though that the whole repairing armor/weapons stuff is tedious busywork and adds nothing to the game. Using the repair skill in the gameworld is much more interesting, though it could easily be combined with science.
And how granular do you get? DO you separate mechanical repair from electronic repair, for instance? Is repairing something that already exists and once worked different from building something new from scratch?
On the flipside, how simple do you get? One would argue that most of the skills (even stats) in the game can be combined under "Survival", for example.
Personally I like the current system. 1 Science and 1 Repair skill seems to me like good middle ground. Like I said I just want skills to be more fleshed out / involved gameplay-wise.
Did something fun happen while I wasn't here? :3Pruned a bit.. my warning finger is starting to itch.The usual stuff, nothing to lose sleep over.
-
The defining characteristics are arbitrary but consistent. It's less important that any individual person agree on where a weapon should be placed, more important that we are consistent about where we place things and that they are placed in skills that help balance the lineup.
Yep, I do agree that the consistency is the most important aspect by far. Also balance, of course.
A lot of confusion can be prevented of course by having info easily available in the UI. So even though I don't intuitively consider jellied gasoline (or whatever FO3 flamer fuel is) as an energy weapon type ammo (other than in the reductive sense I mentioned previously), as long as something in the UI plainly says: "Hey, dummy, this is an energy weapon!) then in the end that is fine.
Personally, I would like to see flame/fuel-based weapons under Explosives like others suggested, and I guess there's always room for more "explosives" from a balancing pov (as long as we get more diversity in energy weapons in NV). But like you said, as long as it's clearly mentioned in the UI (and that's the case in NV it seems) then I'm juuust fine. There can never be too much information in a game for those who don't mind reading stuff.
To use another example: working on the internal components of a computer to recover corrupted data. Some people might think that's Science. Others might think it's Repair.And I think it's both (science for software, repair for hardware). DO EET
Or combine the skills into one. Which I personally don't think is a bad idea.
I would say that if skills are so similar that the boundary between them is pretty iffy, then they should just be one skill.
Granularity of skills is fine, as long as it has a very clear point.
"Geek" skill! Yay!
Good idea, sort of. But that would be like taking the easy way out (as opposed to combining "aiming" skills, which just comes down to "one skill for pulling the trigger and shooting stuff" and therefore is very reasonable). I'd prefer more oppurtunities / gameplay elements to use Science and Repair skills separately, like mkreku's example, instead.
-
Oh, FYI, I love decorating my house.
Oh, FYI, You are everything that is wrong with this generation of gaming.
I'm O.K. with different tastes / opinions about gaming. Let's just keep it civilized.
That is all.
I should have waited before bitching about the skill merging, it looks like you will still be somewhat able to pick which types of weapons to specialise in.I do not like my own skills(Except for my intelligence/Perception) to affect the skills of the character I play. From what I understand combat in real-time is affected by the bullet spread of the weapon modified by the weapon skill relevant to that weapon. If the purpose of V.A.T.S. is for it to be used by people who suck at first person shooters(determined by Stats) and realtime for people that are good at first person shooters(determined by personal skill) then I think the way these skills are going to be handled in New Vegas will work; As long as there are some limitations as to how "good" one is allowed to be in real time.
(It would be entertaining for the game to tell a high intelligence character which dialogue options are most like to do what, there was a perk in Fallout 2 that did something similar to this,)
Rate of fire = Attack frequency.
Yes, I think the design choices we've been informed of so far will be succesful in balancing the game between skill-based and real-time combat. Personally, I prefer manual aiming, if it's a viable method in a given game. I used V.A.T.S. most of the time in FO3 because it was "the way to go" for a better experience, imo.
If it's an action-RPG with both action and RPG oriented "combat modes", I believe your experience should be satisfying regardless of which one you prefer.
-
I agree. Actually I'd remove whole skill and let game mechanics handle the whole thing similar to FPS and let (few) perks to improve aiming, reloading speed and possible special attacks or aimbots (VATs, dead eye, whatever system new Splinter Cell use, bullet time ect ect).
oh, totally. that sounds so Fallout to me! and while we're at it let's cut out all dialogue trees/choices and replace them with cut-scenes and romantic interest mini-games. heck, we could even phase the pop-a-mole combat out of it so you can just roam the wasteland decorating your house!
Although it doesn't sound Fallout, it is perfectly reasonable in any game with real-time combat (be it FPS, TPS, RPG or something in between). I believe designers have a hard time balancing player-controlled and skill-controlled combat, and that is why something like V.A.T.S. was created; to give the points put in combat skills more importance. I would even say Bethsoft deliberately made V.A.T.S. more enjoyable & beneficial than RTC to "point" people in the "right direction", but that's just speculation on my part...
By simple logic, the more direct control a particular style / genre / POV gives the player, the less numbers needed in the game. Who knows, maybe in the future, there'll be cRPGs which takes your spoken voice via a microphone and process it as a "dialogue option", but of course in this case options would be almost infinite, similar to manual aiming. Would that kind of game be less of an RPG? Not as far as I'm concerned. It would simply be a game that Twinkie doesn't like. Maybe.
Oh, FYI, I love decorating my house.
-
See, the world today doesn't work like that. Companies don't go "Here are our terms, take it or leave it", then consumers go "OK" or "no". Companies do market research. Companies do read (or have analysis firms read) forums like these. Companies do gauge responses. Perceptions of fair and unfair do matter in company image, the decisions companies make, etc; and of course those perceptions do change.
Exactly! Ubisoft DID do their research, and their research concluded that it was WORTH the "unfair" perception that SOME people would have. They didn't just randomly make this decision, which is what I've been saying.
Sure they may revise based upon feedback/backlash, but Ubisoft did not cluelessly decide to require internet connection without acknowledging that this will be a deal breaker for some people.
Of course they're not clueless, we're talking about millions of $$$ here. I'm not the CEO or whatever of a multi-million company myself, so I wouldn't know for sure exactly what they're thinking, as a company.
I'm a customer, and from a customer POV I'm not happy with their decision. That's all.
I'm the target audience, because I'm +1 customer. Yes, on my own I may be worth, say, $40 for that company? $50 maybe? But the more customers they shoo off with their DRM stick, thinking they're repelling pirates, the more this number grows. I'm not even going to talk about company image.Simply being a potential customer, does not make you the target market. Do you think that people pulling in minimum wage are the target market for Rolex watches or BMWs? Ferrari doesn't look at Thorton_AP and go "how can we bring this car to him, because he's +1 customer." They say "We want to make expensive, exotic cars that only rich people can afford. They are our target market. People that cannot afford our automobiles are not.
See, you're missing the point again. I can afford games. I buy games, I play games; I'm a gamer. I even have an internet connection stable enough to let me kick a** in online multiplayer (although it still has it's share of problems sometimes).
My problem with their always-online-DRM is..... do I really need to repeat what's been said? In a nutshell, it's;
- Unnecessary (it's a single-player game)
- Unsuccesful (doesn't stop piracy)
- [insert a whole bunch of different personal reasons for everyone]
As if these weren't enough, our little conversation reminded me that it's also "arrogant"
(not required, but desired; the DirectX thing).It's simple. Me customer. Me not like. I could care less about their financial status or company image, to be honest.
-
Very strange that they skipped Fable II though... maybe we'll see a rushed port to put it into a 'trilogy' very expensive pack?
This is good news. I was always curious about this series, but didn't even play the first one because the franchise shifted to consoles. I hate it when a series is broken...
For Fable II, yeah, pretty much what WUE said.
-
Gun chat.
- Weapon (e.g. minigun) damage balanced? Check.
- Skill points & skill specializations balanced? Check.
- Strength requirements implemented in a way that works in real-time combat? Check.
- Item descriptions? Pending.
Overall, great job.
Also, this:
* Does it explode? It's an Explosive.* Does it use Small Energy Cells, Microfusion Cells, or other energy ammo? It's an Energy Weapon.
* Does it use conventional bullets of some flavor as ammo? It's a Gun.
Gotta love the simplicity of it. Why? Because it just works, for RPG veterans and newbies alike.
-
I just wish some publisher stood up and said:
"Pirates have enjoyed their hassle-free no-restrictions-whatsoever games for about enough! From now on, we will provide our customers with the same peace of mind. No DRM, no restrictions."
But of course that could be like saying "it's free, come get some!"
Or, it could be a perfectly reasonable and noble gesture... I don't know, I'm too sleepy to tell which...
-
Maybe you can distill water with Survival.
Shouldn't that be Science? About 30-40 Science?
-
Guess you don't like hack & slash...
I love Hack & Slash games, to be honest. But GoW just...
Then maybe you should check out the other GoW series...
(Gears of War)
-
The hardest thing so far is keeping other people alive. I've failed a couple side missions already.
Ugh. I hate it. I hated protecting / saving NPCs in any game I can name. I'm fine with just watching my own arse, thank you very much.
But the game is very good. My daughter likes it too, she gets on her rocking horse and swings her cowboy doll whenever I play, and yells yeehaw. She is also a big fan of the train whistle.Adorable.
And as far as I'm concerned, it's proof that the game really nails the western feeling. "Hear it from the children." or whatever the saying goes.
I had about 3 innocents hanged before I got good enough to shoot the rope off of the victims necks. Its so incredible watching the wildlife interact in the world. I remember early on when I visited a little farm. I hung out just to admire the gorgeous scenery and watch the farmer work grinding away at a table, then I heard yelping and saw a pack of coyotes rush through the farm and grab chickens. The farmer yelled angrily and pulled out a pistol managing to kill one as the pack ran away with their meals. I just stood there with my mouth open at the unscripted event. 
Are you doing this to torture us PC gamers?
-
I'm wondering about what benefit will have in gameplay the ability of cooking
Considering it's Josh we're talking about I doubt he'd have added a skill that he didn't feel was important to the gameplay, and considering hardcore mode etc. seems to hint at the survival feeling being more prominent in this game compared to Fallout 3.
I think Survival will be similar to Medicine, but for more general survival purposes (hunger, thirst, pathfinding, evasion etc.). I'm guessing it'll be MUCH more important in HC mode, maybe even practically worthless in Normal mode (similar to Outdoorsman from previous games). And that it'll have a close relation with Endurance, similar to the one Science has with Intelligence.
If you're wondering specifically about the "cooking" aspect of it, I guess there'll be food in the game which is inedible unless cooked, and food which gives you more benefits (more HP and/or more "nutrients"
) when cooked, etc.edit: Your "cooking" (i.e. Survival) skill might even affect your relations with your companions...
Survival should have an impact on how far off you hear sounds... and did FO3 have a radar? Man, I can't remember, but if it did it should affect that too.Cooking is probably like Gothic, cooked food gives you some good HP.
FO3 did have a radar, and it had a direct relation with your Perception.
Hmm... Now that I think about it, maybe in Normal mode Survival skill will affect some HUD elements (like the radar, which will probably be left out in HC mode) to compensate for the lack of more obvious / realistic survival skills (like hunger) that are present in HC mode. Would be a good way to give the skill more balance & value in Normal mode...
-
Since the "Free Portal" announcement I've been practically forcing people to get it. It's awesome and free for a short time. They. Just. Don't. Listen!
Other than that, World of Goo is brilliant (must buy, at least try the demo if you haven't, seriously), Machinarium is decent (I only recommend it to adventure addicts), and I just downloaded Gish demo. Will try it out as soon as I can.
-
I never finished the first GoW. Thought it was a terribly boring game.
Don't know about the first GoW, but about a year ago I played a little bit of the second game at my friend's house (which was fun), and I just watched the first 15 minutes (2 videos) of the third one. Looks like an epic interactive movie, can't say for sure without playing, of course...
Guess you don't like hack & slash...
Ubisoft Reports Losses..
in Computer and Console
Posted
Sounds very "Wikipedia". I like it. Also;
Imagine if you could access every game ever developed for a minimal fee.
Other than the fact that I would die a happy man, I think it would actually reduce piracy, instead of encouraging it.
Mark my words: Accessibility reduces piracy. Ditto for reasonable prices.