greylord

Currently playing Lord of the Rings: War in the North.

Always wise words And I've always been right. Arrgghhhh Not saying that as an insult...simply saying it because right now it seems right now that you're right. I got it and have been playing it. Problems... Bugs...If you play it on PC beware. Also...I must be doing something wrong with MP because it doesn't seem to work all that well in MP. There is NOT way to change the difficulty setting that I can tell. They say go back from the character select screen to the start and select it, but I don't even get an option. They say it should give you a choice instead of it defaulting to normal, but there's no way to select easy. Maybe it's because I already started a game and this game freaking autosaves for you with NO WAY to go back and delete an unwanted game already in progress apparantly in SP...which is the ultimate of stupid. Why do I want to switch to easy...because it REALLY annoys me that as an archer I have to shoot a goblin 3 or 5 times in the HEAD just to kill it. One would think if you shot it this wouldn't happen...especially with that nice long arrow sticking out of it. I just wanted to see if you had it on easy if I could at least kill something with a single shot...apparantly not as it doesn't even go that way. Orcs I can understand. Trolls on the opposite end are too easy. Supposedly to ramp up the difficulty you have to beat the game once...which I imagine will make goblins tougher and hence more stupid...but at least the Trolls will seem more like Trolls. Those are simply personal items however. Game overall isn't that bad as far as gameplay from a more neutral perspective. It can be challenging at parts...very laggy. Very Very Laggy...I got a 3 mb upper limit per second? or whatever that timing is...so pretty certain it's not on my end. In SP there are some parts it seems to want to hang up...I hear it's worse on some other platforms/consoles or whatever...no verification of that. Even if it doesn't seem to have many problems I have to say I enjoyed playing DS3 FAR more than this game thus far...but I haven't gotten far in the game. It sounds a lot like a spiritual sequel to Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance in many ways, similar classes and even some of the music is reminescent. But I'm really not having fun yet...not certain why. Maybe it's because I just don't feel that powerful (goblins seeming unfazed by my archer's arrows may do that...though I do take down trolls easier than one would think)...or maybe it's because I'm an archer but I can't go to town at times and buy more arrows and they don't really provide that many arrows to get. Even if you kill like a dozen goblin archers you aren't going to find any arrows. A little aggravating. I'm an archer having to use a sword...okay, I'm a ranger with Bow powers that has to resort to using a sword because the game doesn't have enough arrows for you...probably due to how many it takes just to kill a single goblin or orc. I don't think so though, as I may feel completely weak, but that's not the only facet to gameplay. The story isn't really inspiring me. Maybe I just haven't hit the meat of the story yet or something? I'm pressing on with it, but thus far not that enjoyable to me. I didn't enjoy the Lord of the Rings games like The Fellowship of the Ring and those types of games, and combat is a little like that (except those games it was FAR more easy to kill goblins and orcs...I think orcs are harder to kill then it is to be killed or have your teammates killed at times in War of the North). Don't know what it is, I'll keep playing but thus far....as I said...I'm not really enjoying it. Normally I stop playing when I stop enjoying a game, but I just got this one and that would seem like a terrible waste of money.

CoD has lost me overall...not fascinated by it currently. I plan on buying B3 though...looking awesome recently.

I think some have a big difference of ideas over religion is. Catholics are not a religion, they are a church. Lutherans are not a religion, they are a church. They may claim they are religions, and they are...but in reality...they are a church. They are the Christian religion and clumped into that group by others. Islam is another religion, though most Christians probably do not realize that there are MANY different Churches/religious organizations in that religion. Hindu is another religions with many different factions/churches. Islam does not recognize Hindus as having any validity in religion or that any Hindu deity even exists. Hindu is a polytheistic religion. They may worship different beings or aspects, or even have household spirits...but it is all one religion regardless of who or what they worship. Greeks had a polytheistic religion with a pantheon. Some of them worshipped one deity, others another deity. These deities many times were opposed to each other and there were wars by the Greeks in this idea. However, they are ALL part of the same religion, even if they worshipped different deities. The Norse had different deities and did not recognize the Greek deities as far as I know. They were a different religion. Just because people worship different deities in a pantheistic religion, does not make them different religions. If they recognize another deity/being as part of their pantheon or religious ethos/dictates they actually are considered part of that religious umbrella. On the otherhand, different religions typically do NOT recognize the other religion's deities and hence will consider the other religions false.

To honest, I'm not sure. My experience with "Fantasy" games before PS:T was either polytheistic/pantheon type settings (most of the stuff in the old TSR settings) or a complete absence of religious observances, save possibly the odd "blessed" item with no elaboration of who or what had blessed it. Maybe the odd temple of some nameless deity to be robbed too, but you were more likely to get killed by traps and guardians than a lightning bolt from the sky. BY contrast PS:T was all about belief, one of the major themes of the setting (belief shapes reality). In DA:O the Chantry and their monotonous droning on and on about evil mages and mankinds sins and the just as repetitive endless whinging from mages about being oppressed by the Chantry and "we waz robbed!" was for me a major detractor from the game. It was simply too close to real world religions and persecutions, right down to mans disobedience and expulsion from the supreme beings presence. Sometimes a substitution for "magic", Sometimes as a source of moral values. You follow a nice god, you are supposed to do nice things, you follow an evil god, you are supposed to do evil things. Easier to justify letting the player do moustache twirling, evil cackle kind of things if you do it in the name of faith. However most polytheistic religions in D&D actually is one religion overall...they believe in the same pantheon normally. Hence, the Greek or Roman religion types. Sure there are multiple deities, but they are all part of the same pantheon...ergo...same religion. I mean, even the Clerics from different Deities of different alignments and who may be trying to kill each other in the heavens/hells can heal everyone else...ergo...still same religion. Typically priests from other religions can't service people from other religions unless it is to convert them. I think if there were different religions in D&D games it would be more like...NO...Helm doesn't exist..and here's why. In fact, none of those deities in that pantheon exist, they are all false...the ones that really exist are these...or this one...and here's why.

That sort of confirms who they are trying to appeal to with Diablo 3...and it ain't all the fans of the other Diablo games... Hmm, perhaps they figured that with all their constant online statements it had made for something full of FAIL for Blizzard with the release of Diablo 3. Upset a whole bunch of people. So with a possible FAIL coming, they said...hey what can we do? With this it becomes a WIN! Why. First, they figure a free online game like Diablo by Blizzard, same makers of WoW would appeal to those who already play always online games such as an MMORPG. Second, it's a way to win back those who they might lose subscriptions to in WoW. These people think...hey...two games for the price of one...I'm IN! And third, and finally...they can count a sale for EVERY person who falls under this umbrella. Have a mere 5 million annual subscribers (yes...mere...that's low for WoW) and they can instantly claim that they've sold 5 million copies of Diablo 3 via online measures. Advertising is priceless...able to say...we haven't even released this yet and we have 5 million+ confirmed preorder sales...that's SALES as in retail copies sold...not shipped...and it brings a WHOLE LOT OF WIN! on the sales front, on the promotion front, and in the views of their boss company. Just my thoughts on a possible reason to do this...turns a guaranteed FAIL/LOSS into a guaranteed WIN/Profit!!!! PS: As an addition, I think they basically announced it as you get the next Expansion for free along with D3 as well. Which makes another WIN! They beat ToR to the punch!!!!

While waiting for other games, not playing a PC game currently, playing Gran Turismo 5.

That doesn't stop Uwe Boll. Uwe Boll doesn't even follow the games he makes movies of...he castrates them and then uses the remains to create some sort of bloody mess. Though I do have an unnatural liking for Name of the King or whatever their Dungeon Siege movie was called...probably just because I'm a fan of the main actor and Reynolds... The animated Street Fighter Movie was actually surprisingly good. I'd rate that as a good movie. It was even anime, and I'm not a huge anime fan like some are. Fictitious update...5 years ago that dork won the Multi Millions lottery for 50 million dollars...unfortunately despite all his planning I think he spent it all...on lottery tickets and didn't win again.

It's not. Steaming pile of ****. I had such high hopes when I heard HoMM VI was in development but it turned out to be worse than the previous incarnation. That's not good news. I think I have it coming in the mail...too late to canx that order. It's not. Steaming pile of ****. I had such high hopes when I heard HoMM VI was in development but it turned out to be worse than the previous incarnation. How so? I haven't found much to gripe about it so far (the random map creatures - especially in hotseat games - scaling badly and thus offering no challenge at all, overgenerous economy, and the information overflow one gets from map items being the biggest ones thus far). It's not Homm 3 by a long shot, but if they correct the balance issues I'd say it does indeed well top Homm 5 (which wasn't too good). Well, reading your post shortly after now fills me with some relief, perhaps I'm not doomed.

I loved AP. Far more than DA2. Some infuriating bugs in AP though, more bugs in AP than DA2, or at least bugs that make you want to hurl the game out the window at times.

I got tired of Kingdom Hearts on the first one out. It seemed so much on railroads that if I didn't visit places in the exact order that was expected, cut scenes did not occur. That sort of lost me...as I'd go to a shop, didn't matter how much time passed, until I went to the exact right place, things would happen. Frustrating if you don't use a walkthrough, and most times I don't...which means I gave up on the KH series.

Is there even going to be a second hand market to this game, or is it going to be one of those DRM things where you only get one copy per machine and then it's just a table protector for your cup? At least for PC. I guess you could be right in regards to consoles.

Is that all you did with your characters...NO WONDER you find it so dull. You do know there was more you could do...for example...why simply toss your warriors in the fight, they'll all fall asleep when your mage casts it from the myriads MORE SPELLS OPTIONS they, druids and clerics all had...on factors of 10 probably in relation to other games Bio has put out. Its when you count in the spellcasters and the various tricks you could try or do that you find all sorts of options in BG. But it's not just about combat either. Thieves seemed to have a LOT MORE involvement with the dungeon itself. You constantly sent them out scouting to see what was ahead and constant detect traps, and then there was inventory management...wouldn't want to run out of arrows, or potions, or whatever. If all you did was send people out by clicking on monsters to do battle, I think you probably missed out on a LOT of the gameplay. I can do that in any of the DA (simply click on an enemy and let all the party attack it like you describe how you played BG1) games as well...and actually they'll do better at surviving and progressing then you would in the BG series if you did that. Edit: Also probably already in another forum, but I think this news is adequete for Video Game news... http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/05/us/obit-stev...1&hpt=hp_t1 Steve Jobs has died.

I too prefer BG1 to DA2...any day of the week, and it's not nostalgia. It takes more than pretty graphics and alien elves to make a game good. Part of it is a DIFFERENT reason than many consider here however, it's because I consider BG1 and BG2 basically the same game, just made at variance with time. In otherwords, BG1 has the same engine as BG2, the characters progress directly from one game to the other, and just like those two work together I also consider ToB to basically be the BG3, it IS the third portion of the trilogy (even if a tad shorter then the other two chapters). So in that light, I simply see it as the same game tossed altogether. That's influence a LOT by my wanting to play a character straight through starting at BG1 and then continuing all the way until the final battle of ToB! Despite my twitch finger and FPS game fetish, along with normally going along with the rest of the world in game preferences of more TPS or FPS, which many would equate to pretty graphics equals WOW to us...it doesn't. There is a LOT of gameplay, and overall I think the BG series (in fact the entire IE engine set of games) has deeper gameplay overall than most of the recent games by Bioware. That doesn't mean I don't love their current offerings (absolutely manic about ME2...one of the best games ever), but DA2 wasn't such a stellar job in my eyes...I'd prefer to replay the entire BG series anyday over DA2. Personal preference. Edit: And now, to try to keep in the mood of the thread, some video game news...probably already announced here earlier...here's a reminder though...not that I'm a big fan of the game... Yakuza coming http://www.gamespot.com/news/6338364/yakuz...all%3Btitle%3B3

Maybe I'm just odd, but I think many would like BG1 better. It's NOT just graphics, it's the entire playstyle. I started Grandia, a game over a decade old and LOVED the game. When I wondered why, it was just the polish put on it that made it shine. Everything was basically perfect in interactions, story, and other areas that would be ignored in most RPGs these days. There's more to games then pretty graphics and choosing your skills...and that's where many of the older games shine sometimes. Now, onto more D3 news... It looks like it has it's official rating. http://www.esrb.org/ratings/synopsis.jsp?Certificate=31460 I was under the impression they only rated the completed game...this things still in Beta isn't it? Or is there something we don't know? PS: Maybe they saw enough to already know that it was M rated without having to see anymore?

Interesting. I actually think I might prefer a system like that to the always online idea, but I do think the always online is probably more secure still...ah well. In other news... http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=...;art_aid=159712 One part of me says...that kinds of stinks...but another part of me says...this is like a match made in heaven! Doritos and Mountain Dew AND I get game bonuses...sign me up!

Round up all filesharers and stick them in jail, then you can assume 0% loss Alternatively stop creating products that can be distributed digitally. Got better ideas? Well, if I posted more items (which there are a limited number of quotes allowed, believe it or not) the meat of the articles I thought was in regards to the Witcher, which when tracked by GoG by their tracking method of piracy showed that there really wasn't a statstical change in regards to how much TW2 was pirated in regards to other games. They had a caveat that most of their other games were actually older games so maybe those games were not pirated as much anyways...but if that's what they are using, that may mean TW2 from GoG actually had LESS piracy than what people suspect and that DRM probably DOES increase piracy. But yes, what I found most interesting was that they basically admitted they made the numbers up and everything they did was basically their own guesses. Some are obvious WHY someone would put those guesses so high...such as SecuRom...they WANT those numbers high because scaring people is their business in order to make money. The numbers really mean nothing in relation to what they are willing to present. It's like me saying 99% of people hate DRM and DRM has caused piracy to rise 175% from what it was. Where'd I get those numbers...just like the game researchers when asked for hard evidence...Well...I don't actually HAVE any hard evidence or any hard research...aka...I just made those numbers up out of freaking thin air. It's like SecuRom's 40%-80% in ANY nation...BS I call it. They made that number up. PS: They do address your idea of better ideas...and it makes more sense then punishing the consumer. You have to offer them a better experience than what the Pirates offer. Their idea is to have games via network, like facebook or MMORPGs. Sure you may be able to emulate a server/network but it won't be the same and probably not the same quality. THIS is what I would have put down as my endpoint...that this is the REAL reason Diablo III is being presented as it is. It IS to combat piracy, but not how people think it is. Starcraft 2 was a HUGE failure due to piracy, the pirates had released it before the official game was released! So with Diablo 3 the idea isn't to stop the pirates, but to make it so the player that plays on the blizzard servers has a better experience than what the pirated game can offer. Those who buy legit copies will be able to enjoy the actual server and network coding as intended and it will be a better time for them, rather than what is emulated via the pirated versions. Hence Blizzards reasons for making much of the game being coded from server side instead of from the individuals computer.

I think the statements are messed up, but it does invite showing into how big of an idiot these guys are that are so worried about piracy... Oh, wait, that already happened. 1 person of the 4 who pirated DID buy that game! Okay, I exaggerated the numbers slightly, but I think the point is the same. A LOT of people who pirate a game probably pirate it because they actually ALREADY BOUGHT IT, but they want to be able to actually RUN the game. But how many times do you get people to actually acknowledge that their copy protection prevents legitimate buyers from playing a game...almost never...and likewise no statements regarding how many who "pirate" the game are actually customers who already bought it, but are downloading it for various reasons from making a backup, to disagreeing with not having a physical product which with a pirated product they can burn to disk, to those who can't even run it with their legit version but can with the pirated version. Oh HO! So here we have a moment of truth. It's all based upon assumption...so because their gut feeling makes them believe that their terrible game should have sold better...it must be that people are all pirating it. What great logic...NOT! So the truth of the matter is all those numbers on piracy is basically BS... Thanks for confirming what 90% (another BS number I made up, afterall if they can, can't I do it too) already knew! Like we didn't know that. Tell that to SecuRom and their 40% of the US pirating games... Oh REALLY! So the US has a 40% piracy rate? That means it shouldn't be any problem to walk over to a friends house and see them playing pirated games for me...right? Seeing that's the lowest rate there...so that's AT LEAST 40%. So why can't a find a single friend who actually pirates the games (if they haven't already bought it)...it can't be that hard can it? By the numbers of averages that means 40% of you guys are pirating games and making me pay more for my legal ones? Who are you...why don't you fess up...and by pirating I mean people who actually PIRATE the game, that means didn't buy the legit version and actually "pirated" aka stole according to the producers...a game. One, two? Fess up...according to them 40% is the lowest, it goes from 40%-80%, surely there has to be more? No one? Is this a BS number? Where in the world do they get this BS number? Let me see...what's SecuRom's business...Oh...that's right, scaring everyone so much about piracy that they'll resort to anything to stop it from happening to them...including putting on a program so intrusive (aka SecuRom) that it breaks their games so people have to resort to measures such as pirated copies just to get it to run...so the more who believe this BS number, the more will buy into and support SecuRom! No hidden agendas there! Nice article...I'd post more of it, but I'd hit the quote limit and you guys would get bored with me simply commenting so much on it. Thanks for sticking through this long post if you read it all.

I'm not the target audience for TOR. I loved KoToR series, but I don't get games I continually have to pay to play (unless TOR is free...I hadn't heard that though), and don't enjoy MMORPGs (at least none of them that I've tried thus far). The only one that you even seem to MAYBE make a difference in the game is EVE...all others, you go kill bad guy, bad guy is there 5 minutes later for another group to kill...doesn't really flow well with me...so not my type of game. I know I'm not getting it. However, I suppose the WoW guys would be a better indicator of how popular the game may or may not be.

I just got it as well. Going through DX (original) first, but I perhaps I should give M&M:CoH a try after I finish. (I didn't get it for the PC though, for a console)

I like the part where you pretend to know what every console player thinks. I don't, but I DO know that every business that tried this on console has failed at their attempt. That probably means I'm not too far off on this. The best success ANYONE has had was square and that was with FFXI. I know why I switched, I also know of a pretty big trend that has done the same thing (but of course, most would not be on these boards...these are pretty much more of a PC crowd than the ex-PC crowd in some other places). I'd predict a pretty big fail for Blizzard if they try an always online+auction house, RMT thing with the consoles for time investment they put in.

With all this talk about DXHR, I thought...hmmm how do I know I would even like that game. So...I fired up the original DX and am currently starting it...just finished training actually and went in guns blazing to liberty island to take out four of the guys and now stealthing around the bot towards the back entrance.

if they think they had a bad response from PC gamers with their always online DRM...err...I mean game security... They'll have an even worse response from Console gamers. Many Console gamers will play online...but single player without having to authenticate online or be online simply to play is one BIG reason many console gamers play in the first place. NO MMO (or MMORPG type game since Diablo 3 doesn't want to admit to the MMO line) has ever really done that well on a Console...at least yet. MP games do great on the otherhand, but most have at least a short SP game that's independant of being online...and don't include paid for transactions (AH/RMT) officially unless it's for DLC. Heck, I'm one of those chased off PC for the Console games due to the DRM stuff...they think they'll attract us to play it on Console if they have their always online DRM they're dreaming (I'd rather play it on PC instead...in fact I'll get one copy to play on PC...no way I'd get something with always online DRM for my console).

I'd absolutely love an FFVI remake, though I'd want it more in the style that they remade #3 and #4...or as you say, if they just redid the graphics but left eh erst of the game...it would be great. Interesting idea, letting you switch between the different graphics...that could be fun.

Playing Grandia currently on PS3, dipping in to play ME2 otherwise.