pmp10

Heh, I could write a small book of things I though were done wrong with the game, but not even I would expect the classes to be unique on both sides. The forums were (are?) flooded enough with "unbalanced! nerf this buff that!" topics as it were. The forums are always full of such posts so that doesn't concern me. What dose is that with only 4 classes to try and 3 basic roles to fill I don't fell any need to experiment with character builds. Since I'm not too keen on concept of some classes or their storylines this leaves me with little reason to see the other side of the conflict. IMO the strength of the game is with its small group gaming. I never played the game solo, and only played with friends (real life friends, which is probably helpful). In this aspect, I didn't find the multiplayer component suffered much at all, and we had the added bonus of being able to complete more difficult content too. It's not like I played the game solo but even before 20th level flashpoints started to require decently put together groups. Trying to find players to fill specific roles through the chat proved rather fruitless and the f2p limits discourages sub-optimal attempts. I can only imagine how demanding end-game content can be.

Slowly wading through the free version of Old Republic. The attempt to marry storyteling and multiplayer is interesting but I feel it hurts the latter too much. Between f2p limitations and constant instancing there is simply too little incentive to group up and organize. The storytelling is also best remembered for it's production values rather than anything else. Playing lawful normal jedi or chaotic stupid sith fits the setting well enough but anything else seems out of place. Mechanics consist of standard hotkey MMO fare with the addition of companions in place of pets. The worst part so far is that mirroring of skills and classes between sides badly cuts down on the variety.

Let me correct myself then. You need to be online when turning on offline mode if you want it to play games. When you're offline and start up Steam, it will ask you to either go online, or into Offline mode. When you click "Offline", it does. Next: People are gonna complain that they can't post on the Obsidian boards while offline. And then you try to run New Vegas and find out it won't. Why? You should have switched offline mode back when you had internet connectivity. That's steam for you.

Let me correct myself then. You need to be online when turning on offline mode if you want it to play games.

What is it that Valve does right exactly, now that I think about it? They have a damn restrictive software platform with Steam, unlike say GoG games which might not have all the perks but at least you own the product you're buying and it doesn't need their software to run it. They haven't made a groundbreaking game since the original Half Life (and please let no one say Portal, the game is about the same length and quality as a well made mod). Excuse me, what exactly is restrictive about Steam? For starters you need to be online to turn on offline mode.

I imagine the point is that Valve want to start selling console games to console gamers through Steam even if it means they have to release their own console with Steam onboard to do it. The obvious problem is that Valve has barely anything to offer in a console market. Even their famous sales pale in comparison to the saving rentals and resales allow.

Mark of Chaos was on consoles, yes. But it wasn't particularly story-driven. It's not just Mark of Chaos but also Dark Omen and Shadow of the Horned Rat. All on consoles with campaigns consisting of battles and occasional choices. I doubt there will be any city building or tax collecting involved. No. Dawn of War is one of the best RTS's ever made. DoW 2 is a hybrid title no one really liked. This.

yay.... or something? Endless string of yet another RTS games? Some day, somebody is going to make strategy and crpg games instead of third rate action games out of those franchises. Probably be similar to the Total War titles. I wouldn't bet on it. All previous warhammer fantasy battle games were on consoles and featured story-driven campaign not a strategic one.

Creative Assembly to make warhammer games Was bound to happen eventually as they run out of popular history to milk.

The main attraction of RPGs used to be well-constructed worlds and player options as to character builds and actions. These days the best that is being done is exploration in service of a equipment grind.

Planescape would probably be the biggest name (short of baldurs gate) they could use to fund pretty much any project. But I'm a little bit worried about what the makers of 'Demon forge' could do with the IP. With all the kickstarters floating about there is already a lot of name cheapening and it would be sad to see Torment suffer similar fate.

I'm not sure about the not-aging part. Plenty of wear and tear accumulate on our bodies without any mechanisms of repair. Quality of life would take a major dive after 150 years or so.

Judging success by numbers in this case is not entirely fair - some people in crowdfunding contribute to the project much more that a regular customer ever would. If anything I'd say it's the long-term viability of such projects that is really suspect. You can only milk nostalgia a couple of times before people realize that you cannot turn back time.

How are they contradictory? If 95% of people playing the game pirated it then only 5% payed. Right?

Could you provide a source for that estimate? 90% dead seem a bit much even for genocidal conquest. The estimates are in that range. http://en.wikipedia....of_the_Americas That's top of that range for the local tribes. Average would amount to around 60% which is still devastating but not outright extinction.

Could you provide a source for that estimate? 90% dead seem a bit much even for genocidal conquest.

Forza 4. It's funny because I was never a racing fan but these days I'll take gameplay wherever there is any left.

The point is that some of them may never be released. That's the problem of funding things up front.

As sad as it is - Skyrim. This year hasn't brought many noteworthy titles.

I think it was Sawyers creation and I agree - it was a great contrast to Fallout 3. Whereas Bethesda did a 'crash course to fallout' with player destroying another base in New Vegas you could take part in 'last ride of the enclave'. Now if only Fallout 4 could let enclave go.

Anyone with any sense does blame the British, and the French, for being- frankly- dishonest colonialist scum who managed the difficult task of asterisking the region up even more than it was with their arbitrary line drawing, contradictory promises, flagrant outright lying and mealy mouthed White Man's Burden justifications for said self interested carve up and associated brutal repression and reliance on even more brutal proxy rulers. After all, it wasn't Saddam Hussein who first gassed Iraq's marsh arabs, it was the British as suggested by... Winston S Churchill, national hero. That's interesting. I'd always thought that most people would put the blame on the British more for the manner of their exit from the region rather than the diplomacy of the war years.

Most likely it is. From what I heard various types of customer behavior tracking are slowly becoming standard.

Mostly it's just retuned the difficulty curve, the early game fights are significantly easier now while there's not much difference later in the game. No idea about alchemy however. Alchemy didn't change in major way. Last I checked there were some rebalancing mods out but they couldn't fix over-reliance on dodging or the ghost battle in chapter 2.

Just noticed that Fallen Enchantress is out. Anyone played it? I know that the fist out was a disaster but I'd really liked Master of Magic and could use a proper strategy game (i.e. one that's not about XP farming).

That's simplifying things quite a bit. There was never a chance to reconcile Jewish monotheism with Roman imperial cult and the issues between them were bound to explode sooner or later. And as you pointed it out yourself with the example of Cartage - you could never have 'peace' with imperial Rome.