Nonek

I'm often surprised how different my Nameless is to so many others, not just in alignment, build or the mechanical but in how he saw things and what answers he gave. For instance his answer to Ravel's question, his choice of companions and interactions with them, his method of dealing with the Transcendant One in a manner that felt correct, and even how he judged his punishment battling in the shadow of Khin Oin. I've got to admit that I was a little discontented with the denouement of both the Sith Lords and MotB, because I believed that Kreia was right and so was Kaelyn, and even if the force and wall were invulnerable one should still try to tear them down. I suspect however that Obsidian were not entirely free to go that far in their approaches due to outside influences, a pity though.

I really can't count the times that my old hound has woken up from snoozing on my slippered feet, to look at me in puzzlements as i've dispatched yet another dozen or so wolves. I think it's the realistically recorded dying yips that upset him so, and i've got to admit I feel a bit like that well known butcher Lara Croft as she hunts down the worlds few remaining endangered species. Bit distasteful considering how few recorded wolf attacks on mankind have ever occured

Yes I hate loot with a passion, however I realise that i'm in a minority and there's no real use bringing the subject up, as the vast majority of players find real satisfaction and progression in collecting tat. Personally i'd prefer an inventory like in the first Witcher game, where I can only carry a few weapons and no armour other than what i'm wearing as well as a few trinkets in my pack. That will probably never be implemented again however.

The horror!

Doesn't look or sound like my kind of thing, the more epic and awesome a plot, the less I usually find myself caring. I may buy when it's on sale, if the reviews from trusted sources are approving and of course if it's not restricted to Origins.

I recall another rather well handled manipulation for the more practical of characters was the deception of Kaelyn the Dove, one could convince the powerful cleric that our aid was unstinting and our support unyielding, and yet it was all a tissue of lies. That felt very much like rolepleying the Deionarra confrontation with the Practical incarnation of Nameless, an extremely merciless and quite frankly repulsive thing to do, but totally in line for a character who is pursuing his own agenda without regard for the consequences affecting anyone else.

Ah yes I remember the Warm Ring reference now, much obliged.

I also thought one could play as a pleasingly ruthless individual throughout most of the latest Obsidian games, MOTB, New Vegas, Alpha Protocol (indeed the magnificent bastard ending is very good and the final manipulation of Albatross very cold blooded,) even in Dungeon Siege 3 one could seize power rather than obey the wishes of Azunai. I don't really see this as being a problem with Obsidian games, have you played any of these OP?

One has to admit i've seen a few fly halves of late who've been disgustingly pretty, obviously it helps that these gentlemen have never had their faces flattened in the scrum, and so possess all of their own teeth, unbroken noses and normal ears. Even so it does seem to be a new breed playing the sport. Some of the blighters wear grooming products in their hair, very strange.

I do like the organic nature of Defiance bay, you can see where and how it grew. From the central keep and curtain wall, probably expanding down to the river and slowly creeping over the island.

Very nice. One question however (based on the expanded map we see at around the 37 minute mark,) I seem to remember being told at some point that the Dyrwood area was set in the southern hemisphere, with the equator to the north. Thus wouldn't it make more sense for the Vaillian Republics, and its darker complected natives to be to the north of the Dyrwood? Is this a product of the migration of nations that Mr Sawyer was referencing with the Elven shelterfolk, did the Vaillians also migrate southwards? They certainly seem to be favouring warmer, more european clothing than the more mediterranean garbed Aedyreans.

Personally i've always liked the way Obsidian deals with these matters, by giving us the choice and making us the final arbiter, this encourages the belief that these are our stories and we are making a difference. It's ego stroking, but it's ego stroking done correctly. By giving us choices that have logical consequences we are in essence approaching their creation from the stance of a player in the gameworld, rather than a bystander observing the theatre of conflict. For instance Benny in New Vegas, when bearded in his lair we are given a plethora of choices on how to deal with him, and each of them has consequences, from his escape if you are naive and trusting, to his framing, death and in the long term maybe even an alliance. In other games we all know that such a high profile character would be invulnerable except for when the developers chose to arrange the inevitable confrontation, in New Vegas we are the final arbiters of Benny's fate however, and this to me is so utterly refreshing. More importantly the game is changed by his disappearance, we do not get a replacement piece that doubles as his stand in, because that's not really choice and consequence at all. We are given a theatre of conflict, that reacts to our choices (unlike other hiking simulators) and adapts itself so that we might suffer or benefit from them. It's not quite at the level of a good DM but it's getting there. The opposite side of this is the approach I found most distasteful, that where we are in essence viewers of the piece performed within the theatre, however much we may tweak our avatars looks, equipment and position on a morality scale, we are not actually involved at all. Our dialogue options all lead to the same conclusion, our choices are all false or quickly reversed if not suited to the narrative, our characters are not able to take any logical actions and we are basically herded down narrative corridors. Yes all games decide on what options we can have, so there is an illusion of choice, but that is no reason for not allowing us any interaction or effect on the tale you are telling. In short we should be the writer and the lead actor, the developers should be the gameworld and its players reacting logically to our decisions, so that we are not merely passengers but drivers of the narrative. Video games offer interactivity, movies and books do not, I play video games for that interactivity.

Got to admit i'm extremely sceptical of this as well. I'm fine with Rogues having a high damage backstab, an assassination attempt if you will, but not the constant highest damage. Rogues are not trained in weapons and warfare like a Fighter, they are cheaters who take advantage of the situation, scout, manipulate and prepare. That and their weapons are not suited to delivering the most devastating attacks, compare a dagger to a poll ax, both Fighter and Rogue will know where to hit, and the Fighter will probably know the limitations and weak spots of armour far more intimately than the Rogue. His poll ax blows will devastate opponents. This and i've no idea how exactly this area of effect attack by the Barbarian works, is he swinging his weapon in circles like a Dervish? Either way it doesn't sound like a plausible method of melee. All this said i'm not particularly perturbed by the Paladins role, I can see him as being a fine addition to any party and able to withstand the rigours of combat, but on the whole I am uncomfortable with the mechanics generally aping MMO's. I think Obsidian can do better than this.

I'm afraid i've no idea whom John Cygan is Drudanae.

The professional voice actors they had in the last game seem good enough to me, can't see the need for inexperienced "names" to be added to the roster, though i wouldn't mind if Triss and Jaskier's VA's were replaced. That said Shagga from GoT did a good job as Letho.

I've got to agree this form of quite blunt protagonist empowerment is becoming a little distasteful. Personally I found it refreshing to play Thief on the highest difficulties where killing is seen as sloppy, the mark of an amateur and automatically fails the mission. Or Alpha Protocol where the mission stat summation include a tally of the orphans you have created, which brings home that however justified the slaughter, it is still not right. Worse is the fact that our use of violence is so often clumsy and reactive, if we need to achieve an objective of elimination, why are we always tasked with trawling through endless waves of similar mooks guarding that objective. Why can we not plan, infiltrate, evade and eliminate without the inevitable mass murder. An anti material rifle from half a mile away, poisons, manipulation of dangerous individuals, exerting leverage through blackmail etcetera. We are almost always portrayed as hardly capable, and certainly not innovative. There is a place for violence, and massively over the top bullet ballets as we see in the first two Max Payne games, and they are without a doubt satisfying and distinctive. Deus Ex Human Revolution missed out to my mind in only offering a smart player one path to gain the optimal amount of xp, that of non violence, when it was viable to play Jensen as an embittered and on the edge individual who was struggling with a life he neither asked for or wanted. Severance: Blade of Darkness gave us the best combat ever brought to computer games, but there was never actually that much of it, facing two or more foes was a rare thing and extremely dangerous. Which leads me to think that to make the combat more acceptable it needs to be rationed and improved, made dangerous and have far greater consequences in and of itself. Vast masses of foes, all generic and basically lining up to be slaughtered one after the other by the self appointed messianic deliverer of justice just seems clumsy and nasty to me, whether it's in a shooter, hack and slash or rpg. I'd rather my opponent be humans just like myself, equally dangerous and equally interested in staying alive, life shouldn't be cheap. There also has to be far more effective forms of protagonist empowerment, whether that be the perks of Alpha Protocol, the feats of New Vegas or the consequences being shown in the narrative. I sometimes don't mind playing as an idiot barbarian, in fact I enjoy it, but give me the option to play intelligently and with some degree of morality. If for no other reason than it would make a change. As Kreia says: "Direct action is not always the best way. It is a far greater victory to make another see through your eyes than to close theirs forever."

Voila: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHWo-5A46rg

Such an enjoyable thing it is to quote Kreia, but far more terrible is to admit it.

Elasticated waistbands?

There are dark places on the internet, where many tread. Ancient centres of ignorance, of indoctrination... But I would not walk there. To be united by self righteous indignation is a... fragile alliance at best.

It's the speed with which Obsidian created New Vegas that surprised me, I knew the developers were skilled at developing under a tight schedule but the sheer size and reactivity of the Mojave was amazing considering the alloted time. To my mind it stands out as one of the few modern classics of the genre, whether Metacritic agrees or not. If Bioware produces something as audacious and innovative, then i've no doubt ME3 and DA2 will be forgiven and forgotten, just like KOTOR redeemed NWN in the eyes of many. They have a larger team, a larger budget and more time on their hands so there's really no excuse.

I do think Bioware made a strategic bungle after the rapturous reception and sales Origins achieved. They had a new world that had just been introduced to the players, with lots of potentially interesting situations such as the Qunari bringing a much better way of life to the feudal slavery of Thedas, the dwarves teetering on the edge of extinction, the byzantine power plays of the fading Tevinter imperium etcetera. These were nice human situations, where there was no clear good guy and no easy answers, unlike the Mage/Templar conflict which is just illogical. So why not explore for another game one of these interesting situations, rather than change everything and usher in world changing events. They seemed to be in a hurry and too eager to produce something epic, rather than something deep, and they certainly chose the wrong subject matter. The mages want equality with the common people of Thedas, who are slaves to feudal monarchies, so their rebellions aim is to decrease their living conditions. Nonsensical to say the least. Then again the franchise is theirs to do with as they wish.

A fair point. I wouldn't mind seeing a culture who didn't have any use for the written word, instead relying on mnemonic techniques and perhaps sorcerous methods, such as benign necromancy for the purposes of historical recollections. To see the functionally illiterate as equally intelligent in many ways as their better read brethren, that would be refreshingly original.

The whole situation appears a little distasteful if you ask me, can't see why the lead writer would even engage with the detractors. As Malekith says the gentleman appears not to care for their opinions, so why should he challenge and accuse them of misogyny?

No, I personally favour short and tidy hair.