AGX-17

Which of the classes did you try for? Jedi Knight. I might give it some more time, see if the fabled 'story' is as good as people say. The UI is pretty terrible.

The differences between the books and the series are more dramatic in the second season, Riverrun, Brynden & Edmure Tully and Meera & Jojen Reed being rather glaring omissions. I hope they don't keep that trend going as the series continues. I realize they sacrificed faithfulness to the book in Arya's story to make Tywin Lannister an actual character rather than just this looming shadow, but it's surprising for HBO to be going to lengths to tone things down and soften them up, considering how Arya deals with Harrenhal in the book, which was more interesting in her development as a character. What a friend and I have been wondering is: Well, they're going to have to shoehorn them in somewhere. It's strange that the Brotherhood without Banners hasn't been mentioned considering they're practically a late night ghost story for Lannister troops. There's zero chance of being excluded from the series. We already know that Meera and Jojen will finally be appearing in season 3 (they'll probably just be waiting in Bran and co.'s path and Jojen will be all cryptic and say "I knew you'd come here, we've been waiting," etc.) so maybe they'll make up for last season's omissions somehow since they're getting another extension in number of episodes.

Well Rangers would be the "label" of a character with the above skill sets. I see them as a Jack of all trades but master of none, as in a versatile member of a party. They can heal, but not as good as a Cleric or Druid. They are great in archery, but less so than an Archer. I see them as forest guardians. They gain bonuses in the outdoors such as faster speed, stealth, tracking, laying traps, finding herbs, fletching, etc. Another would be bow range. In towns, and underground they would have some penalties, such as lowered bow range. A pet, like a Druid or Beast-master, would stand them apart. Not as a meat shield but a companion. Could be similar to a mage's familiar. If the pet dies, the Ranger would certainly suffer in the form of penalties. There is no Archer class in P:E. Ranger is almost certainly going to be the most archery-centric class.

Like I said in the torch thread, there's nothing scary about an isometric RTW/P cRPG. You could put as many Anglerfish faces and Cthulu pictures in and you're not going to scare me. The reason real survival horror games work is because the player is ineffectual or helpless. That's why Resident Evil 6 is not survival horror or scary, it's just a cover shooter with ugly monsters.

There is no game over in Borderlands, when you die you instantly respawn at the last checkpoint, all progress intact, though enemies may respawn if you're far enough away from the location you died. Also it's intended as a co-op game despite the fact that the narrative is presented as single player, and your teammates can revive you from fight for your life , it takes some time holding down the activate key, thereby taking them temporarily out of the fight as well unless they're playing Maya an use Res for instant long-range revivals. Anyway, this is yet another bizarre, logic-devoid idea. What you're asking is that the devs make every "game over" scenario end with "not game over but a speech or charisma check." This is not going to happen and it's a nonsense idea. Why is every single bandit, wolf, monster, eldritch abomination and assassin who comes after you going to capture you like a James Bond villain and give you ample opportunity to escape? Why should they make an entire bandit lair, wolf den, hostile adventurers' stronghold and so on for every single combat encounter in the game for you to chat or sneak your way out of? That's narratively ludicrous. You're just asking for a game with no possibility of failure.

I haven't particularly cared for any of the character design art save the original dwarf ranger character illustration and the later illustration of the revealed companion characters. Not that it matters since they're all going to be little isometric blobs anyway. Better than Borderlands/2's concept art, at least. I'll give them that much.

I tried Star Wars: The Old Republic today (free, of course,) can't say I was impressed. More like I was irritated that they didn't just make a KOTOR3.

It's the only one that actually allows for any form of roleplaying, as it gives players the option of killing the whole lot of them, for justice, for revenge, or just for fun, y'know, whatevs. It doesn't even matter that it denies you access to the master alchemy and light armor trainers, since alchemy and smithing (thus giving access to light armor that reaches the DR cap,) are the easiest skills to grind. But the fact that it's unique in that way is telling about Bethesda's quest design principles and their idea of an RPG.

The differences between the books and the series are more dramatic in the second season, Riverrun, Brynden & Edmure Tully and Meera & Jojen Reed being rather glaring omissions. I hope they don't keep that trend going as the series continues. I realize they sacrificed faithfulness to the book in Arya's story to make Tywin Lannister an actual character rather than just this looming shadow, but it's surprising for HBO to be going to lengths to tone things down and soften them up, considering how Arya deals with Harrenhal in the book, which was more interesting in her development as a character.

There is no mistake. There is no deliberation or calculation. There is simply nothingness. An empty mind, a pure being. Devoid of thought, his actions are determined by the forces of the universe, just as a leaf has no mind but to go where the wind carries it. He gives us two choices, congratulates the "right" and chides the "wrong," but they are not his words, for he has none. They are the wind in the trees, the waves lapping upon the shore, the things that give us pause to think. To think that perhaps there is another way. That is his gift to us. We look with our eyes and see two choices, but we look with our minds and see any number of choices we please. The road ahead is dark, untrodden, but there is only one true direction: forward. The die has been cast, the trap has been set, and we have no choice but to see this through to the end. We press ever onward, into the darkness, never faltering in our cause. If you fall, you will not fall in vain. We alone will mark the path for those that come after, each of us becoming a beacon to show the way, that someday, those who follow in our footsteps might reach the end of this harrowing path. And they will thank us for guiding their way, and thank Malekith for challenging us to find this new way. For his is the hardest lot of us all, to abandon all thought and reason, and to become empty of mind and spirit, a pure vessel for the cosmos to show us the true path is not that which is known, but that which is unknown. Godspeed comrades, your sacrifices will not be forgotten.

There's hardly any thievery involved, the writing is terrible, the story is terrible (it even contradicts established lore that the TG is hated and cursed by Nocturnal in Oblivion, not to mention NPCs selling your character's soul to her and your only dialogue option is to agree or exit the dialogue and not finish the questline,) the characters are terrible, and there is no roleplaying involved. Bethesda's idea of RPing is a binary choice between doing the quest/line and not doing it. Of course, the concept of a thieves' guild is fundamentally stupid to begin with.

Eternal Eternity: Forever Infinityscape Worked poorly for "Shaker"... Pretty cheap dude, don't kick people while they are down. This is AMERICA (deep, throaty, GTAVC/SA gun shop voice,) if their idea failed in the marketplace of ideas, then it wasn't a very good idea.

That's exactly what cannot possibly work or fit in P:E given its perspective, control scheme and multiple characters. You have missed the point, entirely, it seems.

He who fights and runs away lives to fight another day.

I thought Varric could turn on you during that quest it's just that it's not easy to get a low approval rating with him? I dunno, I never bothered to look into it, the mechanics of DA2 were never interesting enough to try to dig into for me.

For any fellow Borderlands 2 players out there, Gearbox is raining SHiFT golden key codes on facebook in twitter celebrating their sweep of spike's VGAs.

Just tried Planetside 2, mediocrity is too strong a word. Downloading SW:TOR because it's F2P now, but i'll probably go back to Super Robot Wars OGs 2nd pretty quick.

http://www.metacriti...n-2/the-bouncer http://www.metacriti...-the-2nd-runner That's why. Actually it's because aside from being better games (the HD ZOE collection is more about Anubis/The 2nd Runner than the original game,) ZOE has both a sizable fanbase and Hideo Kojima wants to do a 3rd game in the series, whereas The Bouncer has no fanbase and Square-Enix has no desire to make a sequel to it. ...Morrowind isn't an island, it's a province; Vvardenfell is the island portion of Morrowind. And it's just Solstheim in this DLC, not any of Morrowind (Solstheim is not part of any province.)

Yeah, still can't believe this game is getting GOTY awards and nominations. To G4's audience's credit (I had thought them mere fratboy COD knuckleheads, but it seems I've been proven wrong,) ME3 didn't make it very far in their voting tournament.

None. I don't particularly care for superhero games outside of the Marvel vs. Capcom series. I would play an Iron Man game if done well, although if done well it would probably play like Zone of the Enders (best possible scenario, and with walking/running as the default state of motion since those Iron Man suits don't have infinite energy or anti-gravity capabilities so far as I'm aware, and I'm no big reader of comics,) or some other mech action game. There was a Playstation game back in the day where you actually played a mosquito and the goal was to drink people's blood in various scenarios while avoiding such dangers.

If you were a hunter-gatherer of some kind, or in a desperate survival situation, the brain (and bone marrow,) would be treasured things to eat. The brain is composed primarily of fat, after all.

That is in no way applicable to an isometric mouse and keyboard rtw/p RPG. Besides, take away the turning and isn't it identical to dashing in 2d overhead (no running in Adventure of Link,) Zelda games? Whether or not you're running, or engaging in any other speed or type of movement, is contextual. Watch a samurai movie and you'll see a long, tense standoff between two dueling ronin where they stand still as statues, or circle around slowly, before both go for an all-or-nothing single strike. On the other hand, a charging army on a battlefield will typically (be) stop(ped) charging once it meets its opposing force and the melee begins. From there, they might slowly push forward, stay put, unable to make headway, or be pushed back by the enemy. One side might break and run, or be flanked by another army or a force of cavalry. There's more to motion in combat than simple sprinting. I think running should be present, but contextual, and a guy in steel plate or someone carrying a backpack full of loot is going to be slower and run out of stam-err... steam? a lot faster than a lightly armed and armored rogue or ranger.

I've always like Taoism's focus on balance and harmony, so I've always thought the idea of two deities representing two opposites that complement and balance each other out interesting (similar to the yin and yang representing the opposite aspects of the world which together form the united whole: yin represents femininity and darkness, among other things, while yang represents masculinity and light, also among other things,) especially because life in the real world really hinges on balance. I'd imagine obsequious zealots of one half of the unified duology opposing the other half, i.e. overzealous followers of a god of light and the sun might hate the goddess of night and the moon (for the night is dark and full of terrors, as the Red Woman would say,) without recognizing the need for balance, as eternal day would scorch the world sterile, just as an eternal night would freeze it; but with the caveat that what can be frozen can be thawed, reflecting the female capacity to bring about new life (look up parthenogenesis if you think a male is mandatory for this.) Some casual observers of Taoism see the female association with darkness as a form of misogyny, but they overlook the necessity of night to balance temperature, and that there are nocturnal animals who depend on the protection of darkness to survive (our own mammalian ancestors among them.) There are animals that can survive being frozen solid, but there are none that can survive being burned to ashes. Certainly. Such a being would probably not even be able to convince a sizeable number of people that it was, in fact, God. This is also the reason why, the more religious someone is, the fewer defined attributes their deity has, turning from specific descriptions like "Zeus hurls the thunderbolts from the sky!" to "God is omniscient!" which is about as non-specific as you can get. The pagans were fairly secular in their outlook even though they had gods everywhere, heck, their GODS were worldly and spent a large part of the time drinking, feasting, and screwing anything that moved. "The pagans (latin root paganus, meaning 'country dweller' - it only came to mean 'non-christian' once Christianity became the dominant religion of Europe,)" weren't a single cohesive group, and different cultures had different pantheons, different rituals and differing levels of devotion. Some cultures had priestly classes, others didn't. The ancient Britons who erected stone circles (Stonehenge simply being the largest of them,) obviously didn't have that secular an outlook on life, considering they also put a great deal of effort into the tombs of their dead (or at least their honored/high ranked dead.) Throughout the Americas, you see "pagan" religions building grandiose monuments for religious reasons. Direct contact with the Aztecs confirms a priestly class and pyramids devoted to religion, religious beliefs fervent enough that they justified human sacrifices (a common thread in the religions of all the Mesoamerican and South American civilizations,) the translation of the Maya language led to the understanding that these were also a deeply religious people. The Nazca Lines serve no reasonably imaginable secular purpose, the Moche civilization seems to have revolved around a religion of death and human sacrifice. At any rate, if a monotheistic religion's one true God did appear before humanity to prove his own existence (which he wouldn't do because gods don't exist,) I think he could easily prove himself by just killing half the world's population in an instant, leave them dead for a sufficient period of time (several days or even a week,) that their loved ones could no longer reasonably believe it was merely a big prank, then resurrect them. Or turn them into pillars of salt. Or even just make everyone have faith in him, free will be damned. How does anyone argue that he's not god once they're filled with overflowing zealous faith?

Because the head writer of ME1 bailed after the game was finished and a minor subquest writer took the helm and just ran with what he'd been doing, a minor subquest about a rogue human black-ops group conducting nefarious experiments in identical rooms on different planets while saying "I WILL DESTROY YOU! I WILL DESTROY YOU!" The most significant thing about Cerberus prior to ME2's announcement was that they were responsible for the "Sole Survivor" background for Shepard. Not that any of that matters in Mass Effect 3. All of ME2 and 3 was emergency-ass-pull plot maneuvering because they didn't have a full three act story planned out from the start. In the end, the narrative and atmospheric high point of the entire series was Ilos in ME1.