BruceVC

Okay but they do do desktop application development as well. Isn't a PC game just another application? I am not saying there credentials are fantastic but they aren't complete dunces when it comes to development

I am interested if there are differences compared to the PC version during gameplay, so keep us updated.

http://www.onenewspage.com/n/Technology/74vnphvlq/Microsoft-might-invest-up-to-billion-in.htm http://news.yahoo.com/reports-microsoft-may-invest-dell-180008586.html Hi All I find this development absolutely fascinating, its a potential game changer going forward for the PC hardware industry I am a software consultant so I can see the ramifications for this. Please note that nothing is confirmed but this is the speculation. Michael Dell, founder of Dell, plans to buy back all public shares of Dell. He will then get private investment to invest in Dell. Microsoft being one of the interested parties. By doing this he is no longer beholden to the direction that shareholders feel he needs to take the company So if this happens what we will get is an integrated PC desktop, laptop and Server running Microsoft. Many of you are probably saying "but this is common now. We get IBM, HP and other hardware vendors that come pre-installed with Microsoft software? " The difference now is the price that this Dell\Microsoft venture can sell the hardware at. No one will be able to compete with it. At the moment hardware vendors have to pay for the hardware production cost and then the software cost to Microsoft. Imagine how competitive a company could be that owned the hardware and software? This may even raise some anti-competitive legal issues? I am a big supporter of Microsoft so I'll be watching this space closely.

Valid point around my own perspective of what I like. Makes sense

I am one of those people who doesn't try to label my RPG experience. I like all types so it doesn't bother me what people say is there preferred choice. But I am faced with a conundrum if I am honest. So far my favorite RPG of all time was BG2, yet I prefer the Sandbox RPG of a Gothic, Fallout and Elder Scrolls game. So I seem to be contradicting my own rationale around what is best for me?

It sounds like the issue is exactly what you have mentioned, you don't understand the D&D ruleset so a game that uses it is confusing and daunting. I grew up playing AD&D so it makes sense to me but I can understand your concern. I understand the rules fine... they just do not play smoothly in a CRPG. I've mentioned the problems in other threads: the very nature of the "round", bizarre buff lengths, silly miss rates with concealment, etc. What's worse, is that the AI definitely doesn't understand the rules and does all sorts of flaky and annoying things. Okay but then take the AI off and spend more time choosing what your characters should do in combat when you use pause. I really don't remember major issues in combat when I did this, so I don't agree that the D&D ruleset is not appropriate in a CRPG. What I wrote was, "they don't play smoothly in a CRPG." 'they don't play smoothly in a CRPG' != 'D&D ruleset is not appropriate in a CRPG.' You are nitpicking over semantics. Anyway, you have heard my opinion

Happy Oz day for tomorrow for all our Australian members For those interested in the history http://www.australiaday.org.au/australia-day/history.aspx As a South African I have many friends and family members who have migrated to Australia so most of us feel a real kinship with the Australians. What are you guys doing doing to celebrate? Getting ready for a hunt in the backlands Taking the pet Kangaroo out for a walk Making sure the sheep are well groomed and presentable Or making sure the old barbecue is cleaned

New Zealand, ouch. You must be loving the cricket at the moment (okay you did win the last one day game) I think you and I see the responsibility and opinion of a citizen of a country differently. I believe in activism and the importance of voicing your opinion. You can think your government is doing a good job in many areas but when it makes bad decisions either domestically or internationally you have a duty to say or do something. Therefore if my country decided to veto military action in the UN Security Council around any conflict and this lead directly to a civil war where thousands get killed, because one side happens to be in control of the military, I would be ashamed and make this point on radio and any forum I have access to where this ddiscussion was relevant. But I do see your point about the limited free speech in Russia so any disagreement with government would be ineffectual to a certain degree

Thats an excellent read, it accurately defines for me the correct definition of modern RPG. I only disagree with one point the writer made when he says "And as the trend grows, we can safely expect that in a couple years (if that's not the case already) every RPG will be an action RPG, making the label basically useless" We know through initiatives like KS that specific RPG will be developed for the fans that fund them. So we won't just see one type of RPG. Also if anything the sandbox RPG seems the most popular? Look at the sales of Skyrim. So if you have to predict one type of RPG surviving why shouldn't it be the Sandbox RPG?

It sounds like the issue is exactly what you have mentioned, you don't understand the D&D ruleset so a game that uses it is confusing and daunting. I grew up playing AD&D so it makes sense to me but I can understand your concern. I understand the rules fine... they just do not play smoothly in a CRPG. I've mentioned the problems in other threads: the very nature of the "round", bizarre buff lengths, silly miss rates with concealment, etc. What's worse, is that the AI definitely doesn't understand the rules and does all sorts of flaky and annoying things. Okay but then take the AI off and spend more time choosing what your characters should do in combat when you use pause. I really don't remember major issues in combat when I did this, so I don't agree that the D&D ruleset is not appropriate in a CRPG.

funny

I admire that, I know its probably idealistic but I consider people that do legal work for the "street " as altruistic. It reminds of that show " The Guardian"

No individual should feel ashamed of what their government does, unless they support it- in which case they won't feel ashamed anyway- as there's nothing any individual can do. Do you feel ashamed of your government's wholesale and unconditional support of Mugabe, having the worst war since WW2 (that's Congo, minimum 20x the deaths of Syria and still rising) practically on your doorstep, your police shooting strikers, your cricket team losing to New Zealand of all people, because you shouldn't unless you condone them. You'd also get a very long list of all the times leaders killing their own people is perfectly fine, because the leader happens to be supported by the West and uses the dehumaniser du jour- communist, terrorist, anarchist whateverist the current boogeyman ist. Actually I do feel ashamed of my governments handling of Zimbabwe, its a disgrace and has lead to major issues for the region. I support the Police in there handling of the miners strikes, so no issues there. You can be patriotic but pragmatic in your support of a governing political party. If the governing party makes bad decisions or questionable foreign policy decisions then you have a responsibility to raise this in the public domain, we do this in South Africa as we believe in free speech and this is a tenet of a Democracy You can't do this in Russia as they have limited free speech and most criticism of Putin is squashed or the people arrested. I stand by my point that the Russian handling of the Syrian crisis is a disgrace and they should be ashamed. PS: I'm impressed by your general knowledge of South African affairs. Where do you live?

Since I got back from Vegas I have been doing Cardio at gym. I do 50 minutes a night 3-5 times a week. I do 20 minute on the bike, 10 minutes rowing and 20 minutes on the treadmill. I am starting to feel much better as I get fitter and I need less sleep. I want to sometimes ssubstitute road running for gym some nights. I'll go for a run on Sunday morning

Honestly, why would you think that? Do you know something I don't. I am intrigued

Yes, we can. Probably for Westerners it's normal, when you support totalitarian regimes and terrorists only because they are rich and have common business with your elite, but for us it's unaccessible. It's always funny, when Westerners try use this Jesuitic rhetoric against us, this is just don't work. No my friend, you are mistaken. Russia would rather let thousands of people die than to accept that one of its "allies" is a brutal dictator and is prepared to use the might of his military to stop political dissension. In other words Syria. Russia could have prevented this civil war if it had voted for military action in the UN Security Council. Don't you feel ashamed with your government?

Heh, was wondering when you'd post something like this - eh if they have it on principle to not bother with Ubisoft due to their DRM scheme (or just loathing the company like me), no need to compromise that just on Obsidian's behalf. And any sales they lose to this line of thought will be more than made up by the rest of the consumers that don't care or think Ubisoft are a great customer focused company. Hardly throwing Obsidian under the bus, besides they have Kickstarter. In this challenging economic climate we have companies battling with profitability and people going of business. I would think that most people on these forums would do anything reasonable to ensure that Obsidian and other similar companies do continue to generate revenue. I am not suggesting you buy South Park if you don't like the idea of the game but to say you won't buy South Park because of Ubisoft tells me you have a strange definition of supporting Obsidian and there future projects.

It sounds like the issue is exactly what you have mentioned, you don't understand the D&D ruleset so a game that uses it is confusing and daunting. I grew up playing AD&D so it makes sense to me but I can understand your concern.

It is cynical, but it's in large part fueled by listening to Fargo flood the world with Tweets about all the freedom and awesomeness that Kickstarter has allotted him and how he doesn't have to play the Publisher game anymore, only to then see him do the exact same things that big publishers do because it's safe and will bring in additional funding. To be certain, the man definitely knows how to play the game (he's been on both sides of the coin). With Wasteland 2 I at least give him a pass because he's clearly been wanting to make that sequel for over 20 years. Eh, call Modern Warfare something else, and I don't think you get record breaking day one launches (especially if something else is still called Modern Warfare). I think what people like about sequels is that, just like publishers, it makes THEM feel safe and secure too. Relic could make a completely new RTS, but if they make a Company of Heroes one, or even a Homeworld one, fans get those warm fuzzies they once got by playing the earlier game, and the feelings of nostalgia and emotional attachment that goes along with it. People clamour for a sequel to the games that they love, because it's the greatest assurance, in their minds, that the game will deliver on the same awesomeness they got from the original. The irony, and what I want to see out of Kickstarter, is that had a developer decided to make a sequel instead of the original IP that that person now loves, they would have never gotten that original IP that they now love. I don't want to see Wing Commander 7 (or whatever) through Kickstarter. I want to see a resurgence in new space sims that try something a little different with a different setting. It's hard to pitch a game like "Torment 2" to a big publisher because it wasn't a big seller. Thing is, it'd be even more difficult to pitch the original Torment today since there'd be virtually nothing to compare it to. As usual you make some cogent and convincing points. I also get your overall view, that KS should be about new IP and idea's for games. I guess I see KS as delivering both. Sequels and new concepts, and at the moment it does seem to be doing this to a certain degree.

Hurlshot you never cease to amaze me with your irrefutable logic. Once again I find myself agreeing with you. Whats more important, letting Obsidians reputation and revenue suffer due to an issue with Ubisofts DRM policy or buying the game that will only be good for Obsidians continued financial longevity. This should be a no-brainer for anyone who actually supports Obsidian and projects like PE. Finally I would support Ubisoft anyway as I like the studio. There DRM policy has given me very few issues, and the few I experienced were not insurmountable. I think the worst was where I couldn't logon for 2 hours. It was no big deal.

Yay, I am most excited that Metro has a continued future

. It's a former CEO of a big game developer talking here: if he calls it Torment, he gets more money. The same reasons that companies like Activision and Electronic Arts push sequels as much as they do. The only difference is he's making a calling out to a different group (one that is more starved for their style of games) and will ask them to fund it. Alan thats a little cynical. Fargo is making games for our entertainment, revenue is probably his last consideration. He is also doing it for the kids, its all for the kids and the enjoyment on there little faces when they see the words "Torment " on the game as they take it out of the wrapping paper. This whole thing about the importance of sequels can be confusing, but trust me if you worked for a large, international software company then you would see that its not just the fact that the game is a sequel but its the content that matters and resonates with fans

Cute We had German Shepard's well, the one dog also worked out how to open the main garden gate with its paw and mouth. It was amazing to watch it open the gate the first time

You have raised a valid concern , the last thing that the French want is to be drawn into a protracted conflict where they are expected to be actively involved . But they are acutely aware of this. There objective is for troops from the AU (African Union) to take over the French military responsibilities. AU troops from West Africa are already arriving and once the Islamists are defeated the AU will have to maintain the general security. What never ceases to amaze me is on various radio talk shows in South Africa there are certain people who phone in and accuse the French of "neo-colonialism" with this intervention. Despite the fact that the UN supported this actions and the current r regime of Mali asked for the French to assist. When it comes to the West sometimes they can't do anything right, any action in Africa even when legitimate and necessary is about "colonialism and imperialism"

I bought Of Orcs and Men, it was marked down to $20. So it seemed like a good purchase