.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
C2B
-
Posts
4194 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by C2B
-
-
By the way. FalloutNow seems to miss you Sawyer.
-
Okay? Here let me fix it: I think Big Rigs is an absolute flawed gem, with the likes of VTMB. Just IMHO. Once again: Just because it's an opinion doesn't mean it isn't retarded.
And what's so retarded about it? You are aware that you are calling yourself a retard right now?
Because I don't think you like that game. Because I think you just want to make a point by pulling up one of the worst recevied games ever and you actually think this makes your point somewhat valid.
Well, it just doesn't.
-
IMO Big Rigs is the best game ever, IMHO. Just because it's an opinion doesn't mean it isn't retarded.
Yeah, yeah. Totally comparable. It's totally the same. Comparing two flawed games and calling a game the best game ever. It's uncanny.
I think this discussion is at a dead end, people.
-
Actually, that's how the developers sold the system, not me.
You're basically saying that you want the Mass Effect dialogue wheel.
No, no I don't. I still want the timer, I still want the stances, I still want non repetive, branching dialog, I still want everything.
I just don't think that an existing system can't be expanded, adapted and optimized.
Furthermore, falling back entirly to an old system or starting a new one entirly from scratch isn't the best solution.
Because that isn't efficent nor does it benefit anyone.
-
Actually, the dialogue stance system changes the structure of the game far more than the dialogue wheel does, so no, I don't believe Mass Effect would have been the same game with it.
Excuse me, but were did I say it would have been exact the same game? I said it would have worked for it too.
Also wasn't the original Design of Mass Effects dialog system stance based too (without timer)?
But the fact that it has a timer and that you can't go back to the old part of the conversation are the defining features of the DSS.
And having that system inevitably completely changes the structure of the game.
Structurally Mass Effect was still very much a normal Bioware RPG, while having the DSS would have made it much much much different and would have probably cut out a sizeable chunk of side quests.
How is that even a defining feature? That was because of the narrative structure of Alpha Protocol NOT because of its dialog system
It's more of how you arrange it. For example: Have a number of main topic's in the first choice. Now ask about one topic, go through it DSS stlyle according to choices and when the topic is finished make the option unavailable. Repeat. And at the end use a CALIBRATIONS like sentence.
And thats a one second thought simple idea by me with tons of improvments you could make.
And how in the world are these "facts" inside the dialog system. They are not unchangable and can be improved.
Like sooo much in AP sadly
Edit (The more I think about it. There isn't really a big difference in much a way between the two systems. It's a different approach to it)
-
Actually, the dialogue stance system changes the structure of the game far more than the dialogue wheel does, so no, I don't believe Mass Effect would have been the same game with it.
Excuse me, but were did I say it would have been exact the same game? I said it would have worked for it too.
Also wasn't the original Design of Mass Effects dialog system stance based too (without timer)?
-
It's also is a mechanic that puts a lot of stress on the player even during dialogue and forces you to game it for the most part, understandable as a goal for a spy game, but not for other genres.
Unfortunately, from the Dungeon Siege III previews, it looks like they are keeping the paraphrase system even there. I doubt we'll get an Obsidian game developed from the ground up with a non-voiced protagonist again.
Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if even Bethesda tried to abandon that route.
In my opinion I don't think that's an issue if the options aren't as many or the timer was used better. Nor do I think that it is only usuable in Spy games. It would have worked just as good in Mass Effect and especially in the first we wouldn't have different options with the same lines.
Also if I remember right it was probably the feature the least reviewers complained about.
-
Yup, I meant 'combat' by 'action'. As for the dialogue system, I'd prefer Obsidian to drop that totally since while it gives a good feeling of snappy dialogue overall it's not simply worth the bother as a mechanic and it's too tied to the Hollywood spy movie feel.
I honestly completly disagree there. Alpha Protocol's timed dialouge system was the best (except for the descriptions on the wheel) I ever experienced. The Talk felt dynamic, interesting, real and in contrast to other dialog systems lines weren't repeated 250 times in a row.
-
Opening looks good except for the one month later.
Ron Perlmann's narration is before this scene?
-
Stop saying they're equal, anyone who's played both knows they're not.
I've played both and think so.
Any more lies you wish to spread. Any more "facts"?
No, HH
Don't you know that he is the almighty who's glorius opinion is the only "truth" there is in the world.
BLASPHEMY
-
Matthew Perry sounds pretty cool in this. Hell, I don't know the charachter yet but with all the little western parts in the game he has a pretty awesome voice nailed down.
-
Doesn't this also mean we now know the voice over studio used?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Graue_Voiceover_Studios
Or was that known before?
-
Contrary to that George Ziets has plenty of respect in the rpg community since MOTB. (And very well deserved)
Yeah, but remember what Ziets' record was before MotB? That's right, MMOs
You can't always judge someone's writing from its previous work apparently.That... was kinda the point.
I said we CAN'T judge Gonzalez as a lead writer as of now because he never really did rpg's (which means a gerne that largly focuses on dialog/story) before. We couldn't judge Ziets either before he did MOTB because MMO's are an entirly different narrative (And I'm not even sure he was the lead on them).
-
As much as I like our dear Chris, it should be noted that he joined the project when the main plot was already set in stone and that he's just contributing to a larger team.
I do sometimes feel that the other writers at Obsidian don't get the credit they deserve.
Well, we'll still have to see with New Vegas. Gonzalez former work is Tom Clancy's end War and Alter Echo. Ok, they are both different gernes but still. As of now he doesn't have ANY credit in the rpg gerne. From what I've seen though I'm impressed positively.
Contrary to that George Ziets has plenty of respect in the rpg community since MOTB. (And very well deserved)
(Also all the other writers that contributed to the game did a good job. That I'm sure of)
-
http://www.gamestrust.de/previews,dungeon_...er,id217,3.html
It's a new preview from a german site. Interestingly they especially praise the inventory as looking very accessible.
-
I really, really enjoyed watching that. But I must say that there are many things that I disagree with. Matt felt like the final level in Alpha Protocol was really good for example, but to me it's easily the worst part of the game outside of the fact that you get to "wrap it up". Some of the challenges thrown at you feel overtly "gamey" and artificial (rocket launcher placement anyone?). Also, (this is not related to the challenge though) while it's nice that you return to the where you started out the game, the problem is that it's just not a very interesting location visually speaking. In fact, I would say that it's probably the most boring one in the game.
It also breaks what I feel to be a fairly important design decision of the game in that you have to kill at least one fairly big main character, even if you choose to use non-lethal means to take him down. Yeah, the numbers on the stat page say non-lethal but the game plays as if the character dies.
I think a lot of people will watch these vids and feel that what Matt is saying does not match up at all with their personal experiences with Alpha Protocol. I think there is a great insight though in that he says that they kinda lost their objective view, got desensitized, of how the game plays.
Personally I think it's a lot of fun to play, I'm one of the people who think the weapons feel good to use, I enjoy that you have to aim, the stealth stuff and so forth. But it is a pretty unbalanced game overall, with wonky AI and all that. But I think making AP has been a great learning experience for the designers involved with it.
He's right on the money when he talks about Left 4 Dead btw.
Also, beards. But no drinking game.
Very enjoyable presentation.
It mostly does match up with mine. While I fully agree with the gameplay beeing wonky I actually think that the end location WAS the most interesting and varied one. Sure I was in Tapei and Moskau but the design of the enviroments and overall feel were rather bland. The hotel in taipei came close but that was more for the fact that its probably the most interesting mission in the entire game. Though it could have been so much more.
AP's main problem (in terms of gameplay. Story/Dialog/E-Mails were all well designed. Well except for descriptions on the dialougewheel) is that there went serious things wrong in the concept phase and resulting design problems in my opinion. Development Hell and Mitsoda leaving probably didn't help either.
-
IGN PAX gameplay videos (off-screen)
Oh wow, that ironsight... that's just terrible, Obsidian. Ironsights shouldn't block out your view so much.
That's... more the weapon used. Ironsights look fine as shown in other trailers.
-
I mean do we see the original DS theme back in DS3?
I know Jeremy Soule was probably not available, though.
-
Rewatching the teaser, the vistas/viewing distance is really impressive. Wondering if Onyx can support an open-world game...
Well, considering that Obsidian announced that like the first two entries this is again one big map the answer would be yes. But then again, there are wide differences.
-
I don't see the big deal. From the talk here I thought we'd have some terrible slow-mo, as it is, it's just people walking around that's been slowed down 20% or so. Needless and not a good decision, but surely it's a testament to how (over?) sensitive we all are about frame rates these days.
Anyway, the game still looks the same to me as it has always done - a slick, stylish, pretty game in the Diablo genre, but one that seems to do some interesting things in the genre regarding gameplay and story (much like D3 itself is doing). Sounds good to me, especially since the original DS series had nothing realy worth keeping, anyway.
It won't be the beginning of a beautiful franchise but it seems a solid super fun game if done right.
It seems to do the same thing TOO HUMAN attempted with the focus on action game elements bound to stats. Hope they get it right in contrast.
-
It didn't look very fast & dynamic, seemed a bit clunky or maybe things were slowed down delibaretely for the trailer?
Yes, there is a slow-motion effect. (A reeeeeeealy bad one at that)
Look at the actual gameplay when they fight. It's fluid.
-
Those were my personal scores. I could care less what review sites said.
So, you're argument to ban others for comparing games is basically that it doesn't vibe with your own personal opinion score?
Yeah, yeah.... That makes sense.
-
Wait, wait, wait fanboyism start:
GAF Forums are terrible.
Oh.... That wasn't fanboyism.
(Jokes, aside the slow-motion parts were terrible. But probably an necessary evil to get the "coolz" factor. Like Commercials in the 90's)
-
DS3 rules.
Truer words have never been spoken.
I'll be your loyal fanboy on this one Obsidian!
You can't always judge someone's writing from its previous work apparently.
Fallout: New Vegas
in Computer and Console
Posted
Lexx's german Fallout forum. He speaks about how he frequently visits german boards in the interview.
He's even registered there though he hasn't logged in in over a year. He probably read it though since then unsigned.