Thorton_AP

I'm not the one stating QED when discussing the player's choice.

You've been explicitly told that the video's contents aren't about the video game industry dying. You're just plugging your ears and screaming at this point. That's a fact.

I agree, compared to FO3 or Kotor 2 I've had to restart multiple missions due to glitches/bugs in ME2 (which I don't recall ever having to do in the original). Both Mass Effect games ran solid for me. As did Alpha Protocol. Mass Effect 2 was probably the most stable.

Despite the headline, the video is not about the death of video games.

At the same time, this is a universe where you can hook people up to each other and have them move into each others dreams. I think some suspension of disbelief is necessary.

I had no issues with the actual content of the video, though, which you seem to have. What's overly sensationalist about it? Since the general premise of the video is that video games weren't recession proof (which is what was believed) and that the industry is finding new ways to evolve and grow.

I'm curious why the named it "Video games are dead" though.

If it takes the van 2 seconds to tip and fall into freefall, (I don't remember the formula specifically) that event will get stretched out throughout many more seconds (minutes in the movie). Try to imagine a tick being time progressing. Base Time: * * * * * * * * * * Deep Time: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Van falls here: | | More "ticks" happen in a deeper sleep. Since we still perceive the time to happen at the same rate, it takes more ticks for it to happen so something from the higher level gets stretched out.

It worked for Alpha Protocol. But hey, if "I know a part of the ending" is equivalent to "there's no choice in the game at all" then that's your perogative. Maybe you've had your blinders on for a while now, but you do realize that in every BioWare game (and arguably any game), any choices you get to make are just the ones that the designers let you make.

Limbo doesn't age you rapidly. Time proceeds faster as you go down deeper. If you remember, a lot of events happen and the movie will cut back out and the truck has moved only a couple feet.

I feel the art style is better for things (mostly because I like that it's a bit more distinct/unique). One of the things I disliked about DAO was that the characters were all pretty obviously the same basic character rig distorted for a particular species.

There are times that I think adhering to canon is overrated. Changing the art style of a character is pretty minor on the list of canon grievances in my opinion. I do like that they seem to be creating a more distinct look for the various races though.

I'm kind of confused what your original point was then.

Actually I agree with Volourn's point having read it. He didn't say that you were claiming people did not like BioWare's romances... he just said that saying that a group of people would like to see them improved isn't a very telling statement. Which I actually agree with. Even if I really like something, I won't claim that I wouldn't want that something to be improved upon in the next version. If I state I would like to see a feature improved, it doesn't actually say much about how I really feel about the feature. Whether or not I think the feature is good or bad, I'll still want it improved. But yeah, Volourn didn't actually say that you were claiming people don't like the romances.

Was it actually Blizzard's fault?

See, is it a good thing that combat is recognized as necessary? (not that I ever expect a BioWare game to allow you to play through it without significant combat). In general I'm indifferent to them. If they were gone I wouldn't miss them, but at the same time I have no problems experiencing them in the game and would tend to say I enjoy them for what they are. I believe Gromnir kind of hints at the idea that the only real way to improve upon the romances is to make them more integral to the story (and worthy of more resources). But I definitely don't think that this would make people such as yourself happy, as you tend to not like them in general. So it's a dead end, as it were. I do believe that a BioWare game that shipped sans romances would suffer critically and financially.

Awww, they were doing so well until: "- If you did not make this transaction, you should immediately check your account to prevent character lost." I don't recognize any of those links haha.

Couldn't you make a similar analogy for almost any game mechanic or story element in almost any game (BioWare or otherwise)? I guess they could allow for a more plausible/subtle way to stop any romance potential, in that things you say and do could ensure an NPC is never attracted to you in the first place.

A woman getting upset at you killing whores does not at all strike me as out of place. Especially someone as intelligent as Mina.

Satire doesn't have to mean funny either. (I haven't seen the clips)

You said that you can't ignore it. You can, and the game completes just fine. The only way you "couldn't ignore it" is if you were wanting to affect the ending so that it plays out in a prescribed fashion based upon information you received outside the game. Even then, your assertion that it was required for the result you wanted was still incorrect.

Unless your point was not related to an incorrect claim that you needed the romance in order to achieve certain objectives, I'd say it was more directly in the way of your point, heading in the completely opposite direction.

Never mind that it's metagaming if you make your choice based upon what you know happens later.

Meh, as an older gamer myself they never really bother me. /shrug

Haha this is true.