teknoman2

i got the 2 copies tier so i will get 1 on each. if i hd to choose 1, it would be steam... far too convenient and for me that DRM barely counts as such also i blame ubisoft for the DRM hate. DRM in various forms was there since almost forever. ubisoft started the fashion of using super intrusive (trojan-like) DRM and now even my grandma hates it without even knowing what it is.

Whaaaat? I said that the thing between the beginning and the ending of the game is the most important part and that if that's bad no one will bother to finish the game. I don't know how you got anything else from what I said. As for passing of the character progress via xp, I doubt it will be smooth with quest only xp. Those who like to explore and 100% the game will suffer the most by that system. i missread i guess. still, there are tons of games that use the "no combat xp" system and it seems to work for them, so why would this be any different? Deus Ex, Bloodlines, even Mass Effect 2 and 3 that had 100% combat-centric gameplay to name a few. i did not see anyone bothered by it (not even most of those who preach against this system for PE).

i think you are comparing potatoes to chairs here saying that getting all the xp at the end of a quest instead of taking it a bit at a time as you kill enemies is the same as watching the ending of the game on youtube instead of playing the game just doesnt make sense. regardless of how the xp is given, you still need to play the quest to get it... you cant skip the quest and go for the reward. and if you feel like you need an incentive to choose combat over another method of solving a quest, then maybe you dont really like to solve quests with combat and just want the extra xp lets say you get a quest that says "kill these 10 bandits". you get 10xp every time a bandit dies and 100xp as quest reward. how is that any different than getting no xp for the kills and 200xp as quest reward? and what if you had a non combat solution like sneaking in and poisoning the water? sorry, you did not fight them head on so you only get half the reward!

i found BFBC2 to be a much more enjoyable game than BF3 (maybe even BF4, but i did not try it besides some rounds of the beta at 12fps because my pc could not run it at the time so i cant compare it), mainly because of the sound department

i fail to see the difference when looking at the big picture. whether you get per kill xp or not, the max level is the same and you will reach it at about the same time. the only difference is that with per kill xp you may get a level in the middle of a dungeon run instead of getting it after you are through

Agreed, that is a little disappointing The game looks like crap, that's different from hating Bioware. Hardly, the game is graphically stunning. The waves on the Storm Coast are one of the most amazing visuals I've ever seen in a game. It's not rational to rate it that low. It is clearly guided by some misplaced emotional butthurt about Bioware. And really, that's fine, it's what I expect from RPGCodex, just like I expect the major publications to be way too flattering about it. In reality it's a decent RPG that lacks the imagination of games like Divinity, Shadowrun, and even NEO Scavenger. most voters probably did not even play DA:I, thinking it would be a polished turd because DA2 was just a turd

when the only punishment a person is afraid of is not going to heaven, then that is the punishment that should be employed.

Because this is primarily a combat game and for the n'th time you won't be able to skip combat as much as you guys think. It's probably going to be a few quests, but what about all those creeps in the wilderness and in between those quests? This game is not Torment... it's one thing to have a game that has all it's mechanics revolve around combat, and another to have a game with several non combat oriented mechanics that penalize you if you use them

a human becomes mature after 18-20 years. a religion becomes mature after 1800-2000 years... islam is in puberty right now

most fights in IE games are kite fests... at least in my playthroughs. in both BG games i had all my party equiped with ranged weapons, and 1 member was pulling aggro while the rest were scattered around shooting bullets and arrows.

He was not objecting to moral complexity. He was talking about suffering from a case of what TVTropes calls Darkness Induced Audience Apathy, wherein nearly every character is so despicable or unlikeable that it becomes impossible to care about anything that happens. Some works can do moral complexity without verging into "I don't care what happens to these people!" territory, like in Obsidian games. But The Witcher is so unsubtle about its themes that it becomes intolerably obnoxious. During the first few hours of TW2, I kept wanting to slap the game in the face and say, "Yes, yes, TW2, I get it - humans are monsters. Now will you PLEASE put a sock in it?" I won't deny that The Witcher games offer deeper choices than "Save the orphange" or "Burn the orphanage to the ground and relieve yourself on the ruins". But it doesn't do anything to make me care about the choices...something not helped by the fact that Geralt is such an awful, dull protagonist. As a general rule, if your game's main character's sole facial expression is a po-faced grimace, I probably won't enjoy it. and this is what im talking about when i say that some people consider their personal view as the universal truth. from my point of view, the game shows most humans as ignorant sheep. they dont do what they do because they are evil but because they cant think with their own heads. so when one evil guy riles them up, they follow, commiting evil deeds without even realising it. and elves are like feminazis. they preach about equality and freedom but they follow their most basic instinct and just take revenge on whoever they feel like accusing for their mostly self inflicted plight. Geralt is walking the fine line between the two sides and when you are in a position from where you can see things from more than one point of view, you can see how wrong each of them is in their self righteousness and it makes you cynical

Most certainly will not be free in the US, but the installation process for the OEM is no different to retail versions anyway. The box will be a bit less fancy (last I bought one it was in a typical DVD case with a plain white slipcover) but the purchasing experience is as with any boxed software, a DVD and a product key in a box. Indeed I believe the DVD itself is identical whether it's the retail version or the OEM version (though either way I recommend downloading the latest ISO directly instead of using the DVD which may be an older version that creates more hassles with updating). many stores have a special licence that allows them to install windows as OEM on any pc from the same disk. if you right click on "my computer" and select properties, you may see the store's logo next to the windows version info

i was playing Arkham origins a few days ago. just like the previous arkham games, when you want to remove the lid of a vent, you need to press AAAAAAAAAAA. it serves no purpose, since 99% or the time this action is performed in areas where there are no enemies. it does not give a sense of urgency like "press it to open the vent faster before you are seen" this and QTE are simply a cheap way to give the illusion of interaction in scripted sequences, when no actual game mechanics apply

i dislike articles that are written in a way that presents personal biases as facts. i never really had a problem with the combat, but if you play the witcher for the combat, you are playing the wrong game to like or not Geralt is something completelly personal. i for once like him. i understand that some may not like him, but cultivating the impression that he is the worst game character ever is just wrong if the locations are too similar, it is because of the book writter who opted for a more realistic medieval setting than the exotic high fantasy of Morrowind. the shape of the world serves a purpose and is not there to look cool on the grey vs black&white part, i dont see why the later would be fun and the former not? maybe because the later requires no grey matter consumption every time you get to choose a dialogue line, since the end result will be the same? (pun intended). on the sex part i agree when it comes to the first game. it was a sort of pokemon-esque "gotta F*** them all". on the second game however, sex scenes were part of the storytelling.

most stores that sell HW could set you up with a OEM installation... and it's often for free for regular customers, at least in my country.

the first time i played the game, i did so with a single fighter/mage/thief character instead of a party. you should try the Yxuwhatshername fight like that if you wanna see what hard is

i understand that if you have no frame drops and it runs smoothly is better but if you can play stable at 60 fps or stable at 100, does it really make a difference? i know that between 30 and 60 it becomes easier on the eyes and is more fluid but beyond that i dont feel like there is much to gain... at least i dont see a difference since the last upgrade to my pc when i got about 30-40fps increase for most games

well im on the recomended with my FX8350 and the 8GB ram, but my HD7770 is below the minimum. so i guess my rig can handle it even if not at more than medium/low at best

i heard in Dyrwood they use trained trolls instead of horses so they have already eaten all of them

exatly what i keep saying. why should the guy going in shooting fireballs and killing everything get 2 or 3 times more xp than the guy who chose to invest in a stealth aproach or negotiation? it beats the point of having the choice in the first place

in many games you get unlimited normal ammo but limited special ammo. so you can shoot as many normal arrows as you like, but you only have the 5 fire arrows you found in a chest

religious extremism can only be fought with religion. these people did what they did while welcoming death as the means to reach heaven. the only way to scare them and anyone else that may follow in their footsteps, would be to use the tenents of their faith to deny them heaven. for example, the police, before going after them, could have made a big show about how they soak their bullets in pig blood (contact with pigs = no heaven for muslims) even if fake. terrorizing the terrorists like a boss, and then we see how many more dare try something like that again

my only problem was that there were enemies imune to +6 weapons.

i see now why all the flame and hate for the ending of ME3 on release. it was a quarter of what the patched version that i just saw is, however i do understand the frustration of it all coming down to "pick a color" after the myriad of different choices done throughout the entire series by the way, i chose the green ending.

and im done with ME3. i have to look at youtube for the original "nonsensical" ending everyone was talking about, because the ending i ve seen was pretty standard