greylord

Did you people just call me stupid? I think it's (the edition of UC3) awesome...definate buy for me.

Nintendo did. I'm not certain the 3ds is a model to look at though for how successful or nonsuccessful something may be.

You know you can also get the starter for free now which lets you play Multiplayer and the first part of single player, as well as four skirmish maps if that's your thing.

Please cut it up, I'm sure there's enough developers who would pony up for a piece. Might be nice if they cut it up in chunks via edition. One gets the original and BECM/rules Cyclopedia version, one get's the entire slew of AD&D, one get's 3.X, and finally the unlucky (lucky) one gets 4e.

How is;-lower resolutions -lower computing power -lower game time due to battery life -inferior controls -inferior display quality just to name few, more convenient than succumbing to online DRM ? You're so delusional in your self righteous quest against DRM that you actually convinced your self to believe that switching to mobile phone gaming would be BETTER than playing on PC, as long as you don't have to be connected to internet. Now unless you can produce some kind of evidence that a SIGNIFICANT number of players are abandoning PC as a platform in favor of mobile phones ONLY BECAUSE of DRM I think we're done here. It's about convenience...not certain if you grasp onto that. However, since you are fixated... http://www.itworld.com/personal-tech/13242...n-gaining-steam It's already happening due to convenience, DRM simply adds another obstacle, adding obstacles is NOT the way to win market share, normally it's a good way to scare it off.

Is that sarcasm? Please let it be sarcasm, because otherwise I'd have to think you're a complete tool. Playing games on your cellphone in order to protest PC DRM, bwahahahaha-aaah! Thanks mate, that was really the best joke I've ever heard. It's not protesting at all, it's a matter of convenience. You already have to BE at a laptop or PC in order to play the PC games, and porting a laptop isn't as easy as an IPAD or Iphone. You always have your phone on you anyways. To add another layer of difficulty, AND THEN make it so that when you are on the go you can't play games anyways due to an always on internet connection...makes it a no brainer why the Iphone or Ipad would start to be the platform of choice. I doubt (at least with the current model and how much people are on the go with the IPHONE and/or IPAD that they'll have a major push for all the SP games to only be playable when connected (there are some), but even so, it's already more convenient than a PC. They kill Consoles with that same logic of killing piracy by forcing you to always be online...why go through the trouble. IPADS already are gaining enough ground to compete with the consoles and they say the Iphones and Cellphones are taking players away from Handheld consoles (like the DS). Add in that always on DRM scheme and it just hastens the flow substantially. Sure, there still will be PC gamers and Console gamers, but the market will die enough (in PC it's already died enough that people are complaining about all the games being made for Consoles and all players being Console players...go back a decade and it wasn't always so). You laugh today, but the Cellphone and Ipad gaming are real threats to what you see as gaming currently...and the industry shenanigance of fear is only hastening their ascendancy as the top gaming platforms in the near future (probably the next five or six years if the current trends continue...ESPECIALLY if they start with the always on or authentication only with consoles and their games via the internet). Convenience almost always wins out...and when you make something even MORE inconvenient than it already was...it only pushes people towards the more convenient solution. It's not rebelling or protest, it's simple convenence rules. There's a REASON companies should listen to their consumers instead of thinking they are always right, when consumers tell you they don't like this push to control their gaming life...if the companies don't listen the customer will find a more convenient path...and sometimes those on that path listen far more to the consumer than those that pushed them that way.

The more they have DRM the more they'll see their industries die. I imagine if they start DRM as draconian on Consoles as they have on PC then those will die, and Cell phones and such will continue on their rise with games for them to unlimited levels. I imagine that the more they squeeze their fist, the more they'll see other arenas that are more convenient take their place. It's not that Cell Phones and Ipads won't have download only and other such things, but they are MORE convenient than going to a PC or console already...and you always have them with you. Add in DRM and it's no wonder why other industries are growing at such a pace. Why go to my PC if DRM stops me from playing a legit game when I can simply play it on my console with NO HASSLE. And when they start doing the always online for consoles SP games...why worry about that when I can simply play where I'm at on an airplane or whatever with an IPAD or cellphone and not even have to be online for an SP game. I love the fact that Itunes doesn't DRM it's music...part of the reason I think Apple is so friggen on top where no one can touch them (currently at least, Android is REALLY trying however, but Android doesn't have an IPAD competitor that's...competitive against Apple...yet...). The more they squeeze their fist, the more people will find other ways to have fun and not even be near the fist to begin with. IMO of course. PS: Of interest, and maybe people will link stories to it, I find it interesting that there may be a move for Nintendo to start developing for Cells even while doing the console thing, maybe they too can feel the shift of the tides.

I have to agree, the way they handled the saves via the checkpoint system was one of the biggest detriments and most annoying things about AP.

No, not really. Blizzard lost a lot of faith with SC2. I actually think that may be part of why they removed the demo (playable offline) and came out with a starter set. They sold well at first (2 million+ copies) but retainability is going downhill faster then they originally thought. They are concerned about the expansion, and what will happen in five years time if their downhill trend continues. Their solution is to create another MMORPG type game(yes, I know some will say it's not, but the server side characters, and it's going to have massive numbers on a server...even if there are multiple games/server divisions in that one server, and a pay model), Diablo 3, but with a payscale via the AHRMT (face it, that's the REAL reason they want everyone to play online and no cheaters, he's right, it's not really the piracy so much as trying to create an MMORPG type money model off Diablo 3 that's different then the typical Money Model found in something like WC3). I think this is losing the faith that Blizzard built up over years. I know if what he says really does occur with Diablo 3, I'll probably trust the guys making Torchlight 2 MUCH more than Blizzard. In fact, I'd probably be more likely to pay for a new MMORPG from those guys than any new Blizzard MMORPG. It's hard to blow two decades of hard trust, but I think Blizzard is effectively destroying the image they had of a Gamer's perfect game company into just another one of the guys type company...nothing special or outstanding about them other than they just want to yank your cash any way they can...just like everyone else. Edit: What I'm really wondering is if the Console version, if they come out with it, is going to have that same cloud model for characters or not. It will either fail spectacularly if they do that, or create a new model for Consoles that will change the market so that even consoles will no longer be safe from this entire online always authentication and play model that hit the PC market. It drove everyone to consoles already...I wonder what will happen if it get's to Consoles, where the video game market will go then?

In a MMO you can't avoid other people. Every game you mentioned above has a zone/area where multiple people congregate, Diablo 3 doesn't have that. You could in theory play D3 in a way that you wouldn't _ever_ see or hear anyone else, and that's what makes it just a single player game with multiplayer component. And it still misses the integral part of MMOs, being Massive. No matter how you put it, the maximum number of people in D3 at any given time is less than 10 (4v4 arena PVP matches). If less than 10 people is what qualifies for MMO status then we need to re-brand a lot of games out there. As I have said, have you played any recent MMO's recently. In some you don't have to interact with a soul if you don't want. Even those with other people in it, such as WoW you can actually play a SP game. In addition, a majority of MMO's today are actually FREE TO PLAY. WoW even instituted this idea, at least for the frirst 20 character levels. Depending on your server, in some areas in WoW you'll actually have 2 or 3 people max...at least that's been my experience recently. Not exactly steaming with tons of people in some of those areas. Even in WoW it's actually relatively easy to avoid people. It's even easier in games that are geared to be able to be played SP if you so desire. Some of them you start a quest by yourself...that's all that's going to be in that quest. Why are they MMO's? Because they save your character on the server, you have to be logged in to play, and massive amounts of people can be on the server at a time, even if they aren't in your specific area or quest.

It's not really MMO now is it ? I mean the name gives it a away, Massive Multiplayer Online, there are no Masses that you could play with simultanously. It certainly is Multiplayer Online but those games, and there are many others, have never had any designation indicating they feature multiplayer. There is no Darkspore MO, Starcraft MO or Battlefield MO and there definitely should not be Diablo 3 MO. I think it's vast improvement over normal single player because it offers everything your run of the mill SP would, and more (AH, cloud saves, co-op, social network). Of course it's MMO. Have you played an MMO recently. Many of them you simply group together with a few friends, which is normally a small number rather than a larger number. Some you don 't even group together, but create your own space to be in, or go out with a party. MMO's have various different ways of being together, but they all have the similiarity of many people in the same game on the same server at the same time...and while much of the game info is on your computer, it's played online with characters saved via online servers and without those servers you can't play. I agree, Diablo 3 shouldn't be an MMO, but it is. They just have claimed an MMO as an SP game. Guildwars, DDO, Eve Online, and all the others could theoretically be played as an SP game too, but just like Blizzard wants you to play D3 online with friends in a party, you probably want to play those games with friends in a party too.

What kind of ****ty internet connection do you have that isn't always online ? This is what your complaint sounds like: "I have to keep my PC plugged in to the power outlet in order to play? Outrageous!" Because in these modern times internet connections have about the same uptime as your power does, it's maybe down couple hours a year during a storm. Depends, on business I can be in downtown L.A. and I've had internet go down there quite regularly in the hotels. You'd have to ask them why their internet goes down so much. It's right in the middle of one of the biggest cities in the US. In Montana, it's actually more understandable. On the South East, it seems to go down about two to three times a week for around an hour or two, normally right around thunderstorms. We'll get a powerspike, that will cause power to flicker, but then it's like the entire internet hub or something dies a little while later. So...not quite like keeping the PC plugged in to play...and with a Laptop I don't even need one to be plugged in. On the actual topic, D3 is now an MMO. Face it, just like many others it's just a free to play MMO (though they even have a monetary plan in place with the RMT AH). At least that's what it's sounding like. They just aren't calling it an MMO, but it bears all the hallmarks of one at this point. IF they just went ahead and called it an MMO less people would probably be calling Blizzard out on it, they would still be upset with Blizzard departing from the SP portion of Diablo 3, but at least they wouldn't feel as wronged by Blizzard. I think this is more a deal of people outraged by Blizzard's dishonesty on the topic (a traditional SP game that's completely online and integrated into Co-Op, only on and saved by their servers...that's not really a traditional SP game now is it...more like an MMO that you can solo).

the news on Diablo 3 stinks. I bought almost half a dozen copies of D2. I'll buy a copy of D3, but that's probably all I'll buy. Right now it seems sort of like a kick to the groin for all the Blizzard fans out there in relation to the always on internet in order to simply play SP. Or, for the first time I'm actually considering perhaps simply NOT buying and waiting for a pirated version...even though in the past I've felt that's morally wrong. Ironic that their "protection" would even make me consider such an action. I'm pretty furious. I'll probably just buy the legit version, one time only...but I'm still peeved, and I'm thinking this will do more to encourage piracy than any other game out yet due to this ridiculous move.

I wasn't that interested in it until you posted that trailer. Now I'm pretty interested in it.

I agree. Slider systems make me want to flip off a box of kittens. It's the number one reason I'll never play a femshep past character creation. At least in Oblivion I never had to look at my character. Ever. Not what I meant. The default Maleshep is based off a fashion model whose name I forget, you could've simply done the same if you wanted to decide on what default Femshep looks like for marketing purposes (nobody uses default femshep in game). And not looking at an Oblivion character is always a good thing. I don't know who the male model is, but the male shephard always reminds me of Paul Walker. On female shep, I think they should keep her at least somewhat looking like she did in the other games. I've played through the games with FemShep (and with Male Shep, multiple playthroughs...BUT I'm not the 28 playthroughs guy) and think there should be some consistency. It would be weird for her to go to sleep in the morning but then wake up after going to trial on earth and realize that some alien snuck in and did a total plastic surgery and hair dye to her.

Looking at it, it looks like someone stole an old game and did their own version. Graphically and namewise it looks to resemble it. Dungeons of Dread on the macintosh from the early 90s. great game. Was the Diablo before Diablo. 40 dungeon levels to go down, and then you have to make it to the surface again. It's added some modern things to it, but in some ways, it feels like it could be an idea taken from that old game from nigh 20 years ago.

I doubt they are going to make a single console together. More likely, MS has resolved that it's going to be using Blu-Ray and Sony items with it's next Console. AKA...MS has to use Sony, but Sony is still independant of MS. Personally, I'd say screw the Blu-Ray format if I were MS and move totally to the Flash idea, move to cartridges with the ever expanding flash format. Up to 64 Gigs already, in a few years they'll be up to 256 which will be far more than any Blu-Ray could fit. But I expect MS will use blu-ray instead...along with some other Sony proprieties, which is where the MS-Sony type website comes in perhaps.

Currently playing the uncharted series along and batman:Arkham asylum

Hmmm, can't tell you if you aren't one of those that really love it. I really love it because it's awesome. I really enjoy TPS and it incorporates it well into an RPG style, much better then the original ME (where you hold a sniper rifle, crosshairs on the middle of their head........and you miss!? Really!? you miss!? That's the stupidest thing I ever saw...type thing). The gameplay is much better written then ME (I hold a pistol to their head, point blank range, touching their head even...and I miss!? REALLY!? It's touching their frikken head and I miss!? ME got stupid in that way). Furthermore, it was broken down so it could be episodic, much easier to play in that way...similar to AP also. I like the episode approach, especially as someone who works and only has so much time in the day. I like how It was predictable in a certain degree on how fast you could level up, each episode normally would get you close...I enjoyed that portion as well, made it easier to plan what and when you wanted to do things and how you wanted your character progression to go (something that has gotten bigger from PnP ever since D&D 3e came about with the way people would plan their progression). It also included Bio's usual outstanding dialogue and interactions. It had varied environments (unlike ME1 and it's building that was the same unless you were on one of the only five or six quests on the game...albiet they were longer then ME2's multiple quests...they weren't specifically better written overall). ME2 also had great writing in each quest, but there were more of them (albeit, as I said, shorter) then ME. The main problem people seemed to have was that the main quest wasn't as epic to them as ME...but for the individual short quests, I think the writing was awesome in ME2. Then you mesh all of them together, and it becomes one outstanding game...at least for me. I'm hoping they continue to cater to the gamer at large (which I think I'm more part of then the niche groups) instead of some of those on their forums that particularly hate the normal gamer and make an awesome ME3. Be a shame if they make it more unaccessible. But that's just my thoughts.

You're a very angry person aren't you? Bio and BIS as well as Obs have had a very close relationship in the past, which is why Obs got both KoToR 2 and NWN 2 in all likihood. It's interesting how you like to downplay BIS and Bio's relationship during the BG days. However, you being so angry does explain a lot about your taste in games. I might love DA2 as well if I was so angry about stuff all day, it's easier just to repeat areas constantly that I already know when blinded by rage, less thought to go into exploration. calm down...part of that was a joke Vol. It was a list of favorites...and their order. And yes, DA2 was at the bottom, hey...at least it wasn't off the list like the Sonic game!

Well, as long as we are doing this, I'll toss in a Few Obs. games too, since they helped with some of the original Bio games as BI, and I see them as a continuation of such... 1) BG2 2) IWD 3) ME2 4) BG 5) PST 6) KOTOR 2 7) KOTOR NWN (no campaign, just the game with the tools and ability to make what you want, or play other's mods) 9) ME 10) AP 11) DA:O 12) NWN2 13) JE 14) IWD2 15) DA2 PS: I am not goin to including others like Ultima or Sonic...I don't think many others would either soooo.....

The game isn't all corridors though. It can have branching areas that diverge, it does so at a few points (okay, yes, overall it has a big linear path, but that path has some branches on it) that goes to show that they probably CAN MAKE A GAME which is very non-linear if they so choose. (for example - stonebridge has at least one part with a cross roads and different available paths, as well as diverging into the cave near the beginning for the freeing the prisoners quest, also the foundry has several times you cross over on yourself. It's only linear because they made walls and chasms that you can't cross to block the way most of the time).

Dam@$%$% #$%@%$, You're right, and I got derailed right with it. Starting the Uncharted series on the PS3 currently. On the PC considering Victoria, or wondering if they've fixed Elemental yet.

yes...yes I do play on consoles, as do millions of other ex-PC gamers chased off from PC games (which sold under a Billion dollars in sales last year, whilst console sales have risen over 20X the PC games market in an almost exponential rise in relation to DRM's rise). I could start a console vs. PC war at this point probably, but won't.

If your son wants to play AP he has to buy a seperate copy one way or the other. No he has not... I just give him my copy and he can play it while I am playing another game, without anyone else than me, having the final say... That's called in civllized world Fair Use! But that's not what the publishers want you to do. That's why we got DRM in the first place. Naw, you got DRM so that the publishers could flaunt (aka, try to bypass and break) UK law. That and so they could stop second hand sales.