Drowsy Emperor

Ditched everything to play Team Fortress 2. Damn that game is good. Its no wonder single player shooters don't hold my interest anymore, there is no substitute for human players. Utterly dominated a public server last night as Pyro (the only class I play). Nothing like clearing out three bunched up enemies at once by returning a rocket to its sender. Held off a corridor against a baffled Scout, Demoman and Soldier by burning them, or shoving them back, or spamming flares on them. They kept at it for a while and then just gave up.

Is it as broken in multiplayer as it is in single player? I got the game a while ago but I was turned off by the UI so I never bothered to learn it properly.

Now they're going to be thrown out for eating a little free lobster.

You guys have probably seen this but:

Players are banned because Zenimax can't do its job properly?

Played Far Cry 3 a few hours. Its a well made game, but I've played it already (Far Cry). The original was more intense, even though the AI is better this time around. Its simply too shallow and repetitive to take seriously and play all the way through, so I'm moving on to something else. Stalker SoC (now that's a non-linear shooter I can enjoy) and Dishonored, maybe. I also tried out the full version of Minecraft (having only tried the demo before). Minecraft is a great game, I can see why its selling like hot cakes. That said, its too much of a time sink for me, considering that its not really going anywhere (story wise). Its like the Sims (except enjoyable) an addictive thing you keep playing without knowing why.

And the shoes are from Banana Republic.

Its a tough question. The guy who made millions on Minecraft didn't really have (or need) too many games for inspiration. If someone told me that one of the most successful games of all time would be a construction game that looked like Wolfenstein3D I would have told them that they're full of it. In other words, you don't need to play all that much if you've got a strong idea. I have a few game ideas myself but nothing groundbreaking. Curiously enough, they don't take much (or anything) from the games that impressed me most, the ones that come to mind first when I hear "must play" - so I'd say the process of game design is, like all creativity, a very chaotic affair in which "knowledge" of previous games has its place, but is nowhere near mandatory. Another problem when looking at games that are close to perfection in their intended goals is that they're great in so many aspects, that its impossible to really take something from them and use it because of how it all comes together. Eg: Homeworld. You could say Homeworld is = great graphics, audio and art design + a very biblical, very primal story (all the more emotional because its about a nation, something everyone can identify with - and because there are no characters to get in the way) packed up in great sci fi + very good minimalist UI and solid RTS gameplay. And you've said exactly nothing about making a game like Homeworld, except if you wanted to make something very derivative, which is how most games are made today. Eg. Bioshock 2: Bioshock had a few nice ideas, mostly visual design and a strong story (for a video game). Bioshock 2 is a game made by an accountant. Someone sat down and skimmed over the original game, upon getting the orders to make a sequel, and asked: okay, what did people like about the first game? Some drone made a list at the top of which were the Big Daddies. At that point, another drone suggested: Why don't we make a game where the player is a Big Daddy? Oooooooh, a collective squeal of delight at all the pennies that this is going to bring in and bam - you get Bioshock 2, a bad re-run of BS1 without an ounce of originality. In other words; playing good games is fine, but there is no substitute for original ideas and that's basically something you either have or don't.

The sole argument worth considering. Otherwise, why bother. Grand colonization plans are kinda balls when half the planet still barely has access to clean drinking water and a no roof over their heads other than corrugated iron.

The style is nice but the models look a bit blocky. Maybe it was intentional

Dishonored. The game sucks. The action is weak and easy and the stealth is badly designed. The graphics are meh. I'm going to keep playing, but I'm severely disappointed.

I really should get around to playing SoC one of these days.

Wasn't Kiev supposed to be the one with Nazis and fascists and whatever? Joking, of course. This is a very troubling development, if it's indeed true. Though given the antisemitism in Russia, pro-Russians being ****nugget scumbags is not that surprising. http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117415/relax-ukraine-not-ordering-its-jews-register The only thing that's unsurprising is your generalplan ost racism.

My experience was the exact opposite. Wandering about the empty buildings with that subtle music in the background in a complete exosuit with nightvision was one of the most enjoying things I've done in a shooter. Before I got those things it was nerve wracking.

NOTE: *minor* spoilers. TBH I thought the story started out very strong but really took a nosedive in the second half of the game. I get that Lara is supposed to be inexperienced, but apparently that equals "stupid" (it also doesn't hinder her from turning into "the terminator" halfway through the game); I facepalmed (hard) irl when she actually shouted at someone dragging a kidnapped person around. I mean, really? Ok sure, in my experience I keep my cool better than most, so maybe I can't properly relate, but I'd certainly expect that very quality in someone who's supposed to be a "leader" and a "survivor". That was the most prominent example, there were a few other things that bugged me (like her hiding things from the rest of the group for no good reason resulting in more trouble down the line). Personally I also thought the ending was pretty weak and no real reason was given why she'd continue digging through tombs after such a harrowing experience. Most sane people with that much money would stay the hell away from trouble after that. I mean she lost how many friends on that adventure? In other news, I started playing FEAR again. Damn those newfangled shooters with their aim help and other crap have made my aiming skills weak... I agree. After the nice platofrming on the moutnain level the second half of the game is more akin to Gears of Tomb Raider. The cinematics are great but the story and the characters (which are shallow walking stereotypes) are going nowhere. I still have a bit to play before I reach the end but the constant combat is wearing me down. Finished South Park. Its very well made and there are a lot of great ideas in it. I laughed pretty hard more than a few times. THat said, it still has the Obsidian "bug" of being rather boring to play at times. There is way too much combat, which is sort of pointless given how easy it is. There are way too many unnecessary features in the game and much of the "leveling" is fake in the sense that all classes and options are pretty much equal. My rogue ended up a straight melee powerhouse, dealing 10000 dmg per hit, which is more than double of what his abilities could do. Obsidian's lingering problem is making their games fun to play. They need to make sure the basic mechanics of the game are fun, before all other wacky ideas are put in. South park really only has two, the special abilities that open up new areas in the world (confusingly bound to 2x2 keys, gamepad style) and the combat. The former can be majorly annoying in the latter part of the game where you have to cycle through them constantly and the latter is the very outdated JRPGstyle that IMO has no place in a new RPG. Its simply inelegant and clunky and its saved only by being easy to the point of triviality. Insofar as a grade means anything I'd give SP 4/5.

Some people here were saying that the armed men in the eastern regions are Russian troops.

So much for your Spetznaz everywhere theories. That's the only thing that's good about the EU, that it still hasn't homogenized to the point that everyone spouts the same rubbish.

TR reboot has taken a turn for the worse. I ended up in the island equivalent Somalia, a level called shanty town. I think I killed about a hundred people there, and besides all the killing there wasn't much to do in the level. The optional tomb (in a game called tomb raider?) took me 5 minutes to complete. In fact all the optioinal tombs aren't really whole levels, they're a single physics based puzzle and a few jumps until you reach a relic and you're done. Some of them look very nice, but they're so short the can't really be considered a significant part of the gameplay experience. In fact the gameplay is 60% shooting 40% (opitonal) exploring levels for scavenger hunt quests. If you don't do the optional stuff its almost a straight up shooter. Some of the design choices fall into the "why did you bother" category, like the skills and weapons upgrades. There are a lot of them at first, and there's the illusion that you're picking one or the other whereas you'll get almost everything inevitably. My weapons are fully modded and I have a ton of salvage that I can't spend on anything. Other modifications will unlock in time, but really, its a case of "we can't let you miss any of the content and/or not let you have something and make you feel bad". What it really is is timed unlocking of new abilities and weapons disguised as customization i.e. choice on the part of the player, where there in fact is none. It left me feeling somewhat cheated. Even though I'm having fun, and the story is still doing a good job of holding my attention, the game isn't really tomb raider. Its what I assume Uncharted plays like (I don't have a PS3). I agree with this review, although I'd grade the game a bit higher: http://www.pcgamer.com/review/tomb-raider-review/2/

The few I've seen are crushingly negative. Its a pity, I always follow her work and hope for a new GK like adventure. Incidentally the 20th anniversary edition (or whatever its called) looks pretty nice so far.

I don't give 50 Cents on Snoopy. Or on Mr. 0.361 euro according to my currency converter, either.

I don't... dig.

Call of Pripyat was great. The only thing that didn't work was the finale and the game could have used more polish.

Still Tomb Raider. Its growing on me. I still wish some things were done differently (too much combat) but the game is so well made I'can't fault it too much. I imagine they limited the game to a single location and the majority of the enemies to humans to cut down on costs, seeing as how scenery, animations and character models can and are reused in the game.

I started with TR2 and liked it, but never fell in love with it like some people did. It was too difficult for me to enjoy, back in the day.