Azure79

Good stuff. Please make my character an arrogant douchey kensai who thinks he is the greatest weapon fighter in the world. In fact he is so sure of himself that his weapon of choice is a dagger. Pure kensai all the way. I predict a swift end. I'd like to see De'Arnise Keep since it has a fair challenge with the trolls and Umberhulks as well as some yuan-ti mages. Looking forward to reading this through Christmas vacation!

I disliked the original ME3 ending. Apart from the control/destroy/synthesis, I wasn't sure why things were happening and found it strange that the crew members seemed totally fine being stranded on a planet. I naturally thought the destruction of the mass relays would have caused untold destruction, because that's what the Arrival DLC showed me. There was nothing else to go on. Was it even a victory then, if most of the galaxy was destroyed? According to the EC, the relays weren't destroyed and the Normandy wasn't stranded. If you have to go back and clear things up about an ending, it probably wasn't good. I can appreciate an ending where people can speculate on what happened, but the original ending just left me confused and a little annoyed. At the very least I expected epilogue slides indicating the fates of your party members and various races depending on your actions throughout the trilogy, but I got Buzz Aldrin talking to a child about the legend of Shepard. I don't care about any of that. The real kicker was the final screen after credits when they advertised DLC. Really? Anyways, it's old news at this point and I've gotten over it. The end game deserved better though.

I didn't know that questline was so disliked. I thought the final battle with Mercer was pretty good in that cavern with the rising water. I don't really remember the specifics, but I remember I liked playing through it.

I don't even remember that guy's name. He seemed unnecessary and I never used him. Cortez the pilot was a better character. I always rolled with Garrus and EDI. Anyone know if this will be the last single player DLC for ME3?

The only thing that I've tried and not liked is...mussels. I don't like the smell or texture and it makes me feel sick. I don't like it even if its battered up and fried. The most memorable thing I've had is a bear meat steak. It was delicious. I don't have a moral issue with eating certain animals unless they're endangered really. I don't think cat would taste particularly good, but I'd try it.

Skyrim was fun. I thought I wouldn't like it since I quickly grew bored of Morrowind and Oblivion, but Skyrim managed to pull me in. I think its 80% due to the music. I love the main theme. I thought the world was very well realized and they finally managed to get people to not look horrible. I didn't expect much from the main quest line, but several parts were interesting. Faction quests were good as well. My favorite was the Thieves Guild. Is it just me, or did Bethesda get a little better with the storytelling part after working with Obsidian in New Vegas. I can't really say much about Morrowind or Oblivion since I never advanced much in the main quest, but I thought Fallout 3's world was big but boring and I much prefer New Vegas. Skyrim actually surprised me at certain parts of the game.

I could get behind this game,

I love the response to number 9. If continuously choosing diplomatic responses led to an increase in diplomacy skills and changed how people approached you, and something similar happened with other skills, then I will be very happy. I hope the opposite can also happen and you can gain the reputation of being a boorish lout with no decency.

I don't mind if they don't change the ending. I just want a better, longer, more engaging ending sequence that takes into account your war assets, and your companions from ME2 and ME3. My ideal DLC would be DLC 1: Team up with Jack and her students on Earth and carve a path through Reapers to reach an objective. War Assets and your decision will dictate how many casualties the students take the psychological impact on Jack. DLC2: Team up with Miranda and Jacob on earth and take out a Cerberus cell that will unveil reaper tech the Illusive man was working on that will severely scramble Reaper ground troop communications. DLC3: Team up with Grunt and Wrex on earth and actually take out a Reaper using many many weapons of mass destruction. You liberate a Cain manufacturing facility and the Krogans go to town. I know some teammates can live or die based on previous games. If certain teammates are dead, just replace with appropriate teammates from current party. All successful DLC completions lead ultimately to a better ending where you can achieve a victory on Earth conventionally, take control of the Citadel and thus leave Reaper forces scattered across the galaxy without means to jump and regroup. Basically use their own strategy against them.

Kinda disappointed in the Blair Witch. Needs more spooky.

I really like Spider-man. I don't enjoy the type of game Spider-man inevitably spawns though. Free roam games quickly grow tedious for me because I usually end up bored with the various repeating filler quests like racing against a timer, finding tokens scattered across the world, fighting random thugs, etc. That's why I can never seem to finish those types of games. I've started Assassin's Creed games, various Spider-man games, Grand Theft Auto games, that PS3 exclusive where you become a lightning based superhero. The only game I've finished is AC2 from that list. I did enjoy Spider-man 2 and Ultimate Spider-man but just the web slinging portion. I know I can skip most of that filler stuff and trudge on with the main quest, but the main quests themselves aren't very interesting for me either. Its usually go/drive somewhere and then a fight ensues. I know that a lot of people find the free roaming gameplay fun. I wish I was one of them. I'd rather have a Spider-man game that had a really tight narrative in a tighter denser space, even if it meant limiting the web-slinging somewhat. I wouldn't mind seeing Spider-man taking cues from Batman AA and AC. I didn't mind hunting for Riddler tokens because each was a little mini puzzle and it led to the over-arching side plot of saving hostages from the RIddler. That was engaging. I didn't mind fighting random thugs because the combat was simple yet deep and incredibly fun. I didn't mind all the other side missions because each involved a great Batman villain and had mini plot of its own. Just my 2 cents.

Well, color me insane then. I'm not saying DA2 combat is bad, but it did get tedious after a while. When I played on normal all I had to do was spam AOE attacks to win most encounters, while my archer Hawke pinned down mages. On nightmare it was a bit more challenging, but mostly due to enemies spawning on top of my mages and one hit kill backstabs from enemy rogues. I don't mind that as much as some people, but I don't think it's good gameplay. The main reason I don't replay DA2 is because the thought of slogging through the combat is enough of a deterrent. I replayed IWD recently and the combat was a lot more diverse and interesting. It has more options spell-wise, more options tactics wise since each party member can move independently over the entire map, so you can set up traps and ambushes, better combat encounters where enemies are placed in strategically favorable positions and you had to work around it, and enemies had the same skills as your party, so you knew a mage was a real threat and could pretty much wreak havoc on your party. All DA2 mages seemed to do was throw out an exploding ball that killed everyone that didn't move out of the way fast enough. I will agree that warriors in DA2 were more fun to play due to having their own skillset, but overall IE game combat is much better than DA2.

I loved the wilderness areas in BG1. I liked it precisely because many maps were largely empty with a one or two nice encounters on them. It really added to the atmosphere and the feeling that I was in the wilderness. The emptiness itself is what added that extra layer of fun for me. First time playing, I ran headlong into that Ogre mage and nymph encounter and died. Then I ran into a pack or direwolves and vampire wolves, then straight into basilisks. I quickly learned to have my ranger or thief always scout ahead and while chances are there would be nothing since most of the map is empty, there still was a chance that something horrible could be lurking somewhere. The emptiness added to the tension and the excitement when I discovered something new.

I feel the opposite of OP. I want something meaty and engrossing to sink my teeth into. While I enjoyed Skyrim and can appreciate the strategy and fun involved in games like League of Legends, I never find myself captivated to the same extent as a good cRPG. I can't fully articulate why this is. While I do enjoy recent games, I usually find myself playing a few hours then stopping, while with a lot of good cRPGs and I'll spend the entire night exploring the game world not even aware of the passage of time.

Looking good. I'm glad to find out what goes into making a game, although I'm sure it's just a quick peek. Very interesting. Please keep them coming.

Is there new character interaction? Like old NPCs voicing their opinions on key events and such.

It's ok. I've never played System Shock 2. Good news to me. I'm all for a deep engaging RPG that tells a personal story.

My favorite RPG city has always been Baldur's Gate. I don't think anything has come close the capturing that 'wow I'm in a city' feel. Oh wait, Sigil was also great.

Discovering secret/powerful styles through chance and circumstance is a big part of Chinese wuxia novels, so if the monk is based on eastern themes, I would like to see something like this. I agree there should be carryover to other classes and they should NOT take cues from Dragonball Z or ridiculous JRPG attacks.

Morning: Gym session with friend. Did many many overhead presses Lunch: Had some tasty Shanghai style dumplings Afternoon: Worked and studied some Dinner: Korean food Evening: Resisted invitation to go drinking. Spent a nice evening drinking tea and watching some TV. Soon: sleepy time. Overall: Good Day.

Playing some Left 4 Dead 2 with some friends of mine. We're just playing through the campaign missions. I've had it forever but never played it since FPS style games aren't my preferred genre, but cooperative play with friends makes the whole thing fun.

I was curious to skimmed through the playthroughs of the single player DLCs skipping the combat and stuff. Not original or awesome or anything but I think it would have been better than the Crucible plot device.

I don't plan on getting BG:EE, but I've convinced my friend to get on on tablet when it comes out. He's never played and since I talk about the the IE games so much he wants to give it a go. If he likes it, I can probably convince him to get the old ones on GOG.

Hmm, I do like the original better. Sarevok is definitely more menacing when actually moving.

Do the single player DLCs add anything significant to the story? If it doesn't really change the lackluster endings, I'm not sure what the point is. The only DLC I would buy is something that would totally revamp the ending sequence. Make it something like ME2, special sequences utilizing special abilities from your squadmates from ME2 and ME3, completing special mission objectives with different squadmates etc.