Slowtrain

DP

argh.

Depressing thought.

There's Gimp which is an open source (free) alternative to Photoshop. It's as hard to use as photoshop, and if you know Photoshop there's no guarantee that'll help you know Gimp, but it's very powerful and heavily supported since it's what Hollywood and all *NIX distros use. http://www.gimp.org/ lol. You didn't even read the thread did you, Krezzie? I read the thread. Is there a problem with me repeating another person's recommendation? I should think the more voices the better. No, of course not. The way you responded just struck me as humorous for some reason. No offense meant.

I would reverse that and say that the combacy tactics were dictated by personailty type. Myron the wimpy scientist had distinctly different settable combat options, mostly variations of "Piss trousers and run", from Sulik.

Aliens may not be fine art but its got a ton of quotable lines! That makes it all good right there.

Control schemes are already awkward and clunky even in the best of games. Why make it intentionally worse? The WItcher has some really primitive feeling movement mechanics in some aspects; like I am playing a game from 10 years ago.

Why do you say that?

I haven't seen it yet, but I plan to. RAF is fascinating for a myriad of reasons. It's sort of the idealist's slow journey into radicalism and terrorism. I dunno what use it has in an art class, maybe for depicting a period of American cultural invasion, consumerism and 'hippiedom' both. I'd rather not spend time watching a film for an art class either, but its an experiemental drawing class. Mostly it is based around drawing from and in response to the human figure but sometimes the instructor likes us to draw in response to other things. In this case he wants us to see the movie then draw a response(s). Personally, I'd rather draw a response to Aliens, but eh, I freely admit my taste in movies is not very sophisticated.

There are other ways to add challenge to gameplay mechanics other than gimping a players ability to control their avatar. COntrol schemes have enougb problems given the currently unavoidable limitations of our inpout devices without adding intentional difficulties to player control into the mix. If there were no other way to add challenge to games then sure, what else are you going to do. But there are in fact SO MANY wasy to make games challenging, then gimping player control seems a real huge copout for a designer. Again, this is just my opion, based on the belief that avatar control should be as seamless, treansparent, and "normalized" as possible. If other people want avatar control to feel more like a mingame, that is certainly there right. I just won't be playing those games. And I am not just referring to RE5 here. I have recent issues with both The Witcher and Far Cry 2 as far as avatar control goes. ALthough in both cases I think those were limitations of their design vs intentional gimping.

Hit them with the igni sign while you are hacking away. They take a lot of fire damage. It brings the HP down fast. If you use the fast style it can sometimes be helpful because once you get on them they are being hit too fast to attack back. Fast style takes longer to kill them though so it can sometimes backfire. The Coccadium is a mini-boss. Very tough. The regular Archepores aren't so bad.

There's Gimp which is an open source (free) alternative to Photoshop. It's as hard to use as photoshop, and if you know Photoshop there's no guarantee that'll help you know Gimp, but it's very powerful and heavily supported since it's what Hollywood and all *NIX distros use. http://www.gimp.org/ lol. You didn't even read the thread did you, Krezzie?

I have to watch something called the baader meinhof complex for one of my art classes. Has anybody seen it? Is it worth spending the time watching?

Why do you say that?

I used to spend a lot of time working out. Every day of the week. For years. Then suddenly, for some reason, I realized that it wasn't actually making my life any better. So now I walk a lot just to stay reasonably healthy as part of my day to day routine and eat mostly fruits and vegetables. But that's it. So anyway, tonight I jiggled my fat, ate some crackers, and went to bed. Never been happier.

It's unlikely that Bethsda will allow any changes to the skills anyway. But maybe a new perq or two that were related to gambling would be cool.

We're all stupid. But we are all less stupid than Oblivion. So that's something.

I won't dispute that Resident Evil maintains its mechanic to prevent simple running and gunning, however, given games typically don't even feature the mechanic you describe (turning your head and raising your arm), you're effectively stating that pretty much every game makes an arbitrary decision to either turn your head, or raise your hand. Every game makes arbitrary decisions on how to make game challenging. Certainly. Does a weapon fo 20 points of damage? Or 50? How much health does a pc get per level. Etc. Those are all arbitrary numbers that come out of an attempt to baolance difficulty and challenge. My issue isn't with devs using arbitrary design choices. My issue is specifically with applying arbtitrary design choices to player control of their character. Controlling your character shouldn't be a minigame; It should be as intuitive and transparent as possible. There are other ways to make the concept of moving vs shooting a part of gameplay, then simply saying abitrarily either X or Y. As I said that's just my opinion. Obviously others disagree. TB games like that are all about controlling and regulating action and movement by the numbers. Its a different approach and not really comparable.

Though I agree with Hell Kitty that it is a dev choice, I do agree with Kaftan as well. Crippling the controls intentionally is as bit wonky. It would be like saying you can't turn your head and move your hands at the same time. OK, sure, it's a gameplay mechanic that will make the game harder, but it is also fairly arbitrary and dumb. I can't support it. At the same time, that's grossly different than being able to move and fire a gun. Actaully I disagree tyhat it is less arbitrary. While the choice between running vs shooting is a gameplay factor; the choice bewteen turning your head to look at something vs raising a hand to make an attack could just as easily be a significant gameplay factor. The only difference is one of scale: running and shooting are big movements; turning your head and raising your hand are smaller movements. Either way they are simply arbitrary choices no how to limit a players control in order to make the game harder. Its a cop out n game design in my opinon. Ther are other, more interesting. and less annoying ways to make games challenging.

I can't stand the current crop of PC vs MAC ads from either side. I'm a pc! I'm a Mac! Burn in hell both of you.

The less Microsoft owns the better. Especially anything game related.

Though I agree with Hell Kitty that it is a dev choice, I do agree with Kaftan as well. Crippling the controls intentionally is as bit wonky. It would be like saying you can't turn your head and move your hands at the same time. OK, sure, it's a gameplay mechanic that will make the game harder, but it is also fairly arbitrary and dumb. I can't support it.

I've seen so much advertising spam for this game in the last few days that I now simply hope it burns in hell.

That's EXACTLY what I say to people about Oblivion. Kudos.

I remember when that was state of the art and my computer grunted and groaned trying to push all those polygons. Meh. Going to go put my teeth in a jar now.