greylord

Maybe it's just because it's late/early, but the last few threads I've read I've laughed quite a bit. I'm not certain if some of the responses are meant to be funny or not, but they are hilarious right now. I have to say I loved DS2. DS1 was meh...it was a nice idea...and I loved the music, but I'd rather play Diablo or some other game. DS2 kept me hooked for a playthrough or two. Thought it was great. Have to finish DS3 before passing any judgement on it.

I have high hopes for Runic.

By all that's unholy... I just snorted my coffee. LOL.

Uhmmmm, Square Enix may be a well known publisher but you can't really suspect them of giving out bribe money. Their recent games aren't exactly known for scoring too high. Also, yes. There are journalists that have a personal feud against Obsidian as evidenced by a recent escapist article. I'm not suspecting them of giving bribe money. I'm saying they probably have the means to, just like EA. I also don't automatically suspect EA of dealing out bribe money if their games happen to score a little higher. An 8.0 from Gamespot compared to the 9.5 Origins got from Kevin VanOrd is hardly flattering for Dragon Age 2. What is this 'evidence'? Why would anyone 'have it out for Obsidian' in the first place? Sounds absolutely ridculous. [sarcasm] [saying to make a point, not that it's real] Probably because they paid us 5,000 USD in bonus goodies as compliments for "incentives" to aid us in our review of DA2, and SE sent nothing. There's no sense in fighting the system. [/sarcasm] [/saying to make a point, not that it's real] More on the point [but still simply stating things to make a point, not that I'm an actual professional reviewer that's going to state something like that and get reamed about it like the PR firm did] Guess which game got the honest review, and which one got the...let's praise it to high hell so they actually send us a preview copy of ME3 review? For an FF game by SE, sure it will get a good review in hopes that the next FF game will be given to the company for a good review. I haven't even finished DS3 yet, but guess what, it's review was already written (not by me, obviously) BEFORE it was even released...and for some games these reviews are written in part before the review copies are even recieved. For Nier or other SE games...there's no real big incentive to give it a gushing review...so it gets handed off to the kid in the corner office who we hope can do a halfway decent job. They can and will yank all previews, interviews, and other perks if they don't like how you review their game...if you hadn't realized it yet...someone else stated it much more clearly recently. Many reviews are honest reviews...others are simply part of the entire PR machine...and a mighty PR machine it is. You're probably better trusting user reviews than "professional"reviews...though here's something else to think about...the "professional" reviews sometimes are done by those whose only merits are that we hired them to bring us coffee in the morning, but overall they have no qualifications other than...we don't need someone to really focus on this review so we can get a head jump on the previews of the next game...so hand it to them so we can get to work on the real money makers. What are the real money makers...unless you are the first one to release a game review (which are getting earlier and earlier...many are from prebuilds occasionally, even, just so they can be the first)...reviews aren't where the money makers are. People pay for access for other items, or click on a website to see previews and other items of the next big thing that they think will be the next great game on their list. A Diablo 3 Preview will be a bigger source of people wanting access to it (either via web, magazine article or other) than a review of DS3 at this point. So will a preview of ME3. If BW was to release Dragon Age 3 tomorrow to everyone surprise, as long as it wasn't a buggy piece of a game that would destroy your computer it would probably be at a minimum a 7.5, more likely an 8...even if we really didn't think it that great. Even if it had a computer destroying bug...it would be at least a 6... Why? Because you/the website/magazine needs the next big preview for ME3....because that's going to bring in the money...and it's all about the money. If another expansion for WoW was dropped on us tomorrow out of nowhere...it would rate at a minimum a 7.5, and probably an 8. Hopefully it would even get in the mid 8-9 range. Why? Because we want that next preview for Diablo 3...that's where the hot money is coming from next (though news of a sudden WoW expansion release is pretty hot as well...the news...not the review...could generate some nice cash)...and if we thrash Blizzards game and burn bridges...they may not like us enough to give us that exclusive we want. From what I'm seeing on DS3 so far, many PC users do NOT like DS3. They don't like how the keys work with the mouse synergy. They do not like how MP works. To contrast that, it's doing better in the console arena IMO, thus far. Probably reviews are more honest than they were for DA2, at least what the "professional" reviewer thinks...who in this case just happens to be the coffee boy from the corner office. You should have seen his face, he was pretty elated we were giving him something like this to do for once. On the otherhand the editor (who scratches all my work out as well and rewrites half of it) wasn't to thrilled to edit it and send it back for a rewrite 12 times over. [/but still simply stating things to make a point, not that I'm an actual professional reviewer that's going to state something like that and get reamed about it like the PR firm did]

I'm about to start playing DS3. This means I'll probably be away from the forums for a little while...I'll be playing a game intensely. Till that point I had played Alpha Protocol. I figured out, you know, I think I like being a bad guy once in a while. Now off to DS3.

That was pretty harsh review. It's pretty stupid how he goes on about how the controls aren't fine for PC, but I didn't see him mention once how you can use a bloody controller on the PC as well and the controls will be just as fine as on consoles. Maybe if Dungeon Siege 3 lasted 50 hours (20 of those using same maps over and over again) the game would have gotten a better score. Both reviews are sad. They show how out of touch Gamespot and IGN are giving horrible games like Dragon Age 2 8's and above, while giving this very solid, well written game with excellent combat mechanics, 6.5 and under. It seems like the expectations for an ARPG are so set in stone, and if they don't get what they want, ie. Diablo style multi player, then it's just not good. Well this game is something different, but it's still very good and it's sad to see the major sites ignore this. Worse still, this will hurt sales in North America badly. I would have loved to see it get an 8 from both these sites, because imo, that's what it deserves. Dragon Age 2 on the other hand...5 or 6 would have been more appropriate. That's because the PR firm didn't pay as much for them to praise DS3 as the PR firm for DA2 paid them. Next time the PR firm will cut them out (bad idea) or pay higher (like EA did for DA2).

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6320314/no-ne...all%3Btitle%3B5 No next-gen PlayStation 'for quite some time' - Sony I already thought so, but some were predicting it coming sooner rather than later. X-box who knows...they were right on Nintendo however. Then again, that Nintendo is coming out with a new console was no surprise to anyone...well anyone who was following the slipping sales of the Wii over the past little while.

And there is the explanation of how DA2 got such good reviews overall. Not like most who followed reviews didn't already realize this was happening and it was obvious this happened with the reviews of DA2...hence the pressure to put out a good review for the future... This is why I trust user reviews over site reviews typically. I've seen sites give stellar games 5's because they have no clue about the genre or those who play those types of games...and it goes up to the high 8's to the 9s with the user reviews...and the exact opposite with other games. Of course using that scale with DA2 via Gamespot...it get's relatively close to the site's reviews from the users...so perhaps my model only works for small time games that sell under 200,000 copies rather than big time games that everyone buys or trys.

They may also get better sales next time if they don't have it d/l only as well for consoles. You'd think with a namebrand name like D&D they'd realize the bigger sales on consoles don't come from PSN but from hard copy sales (and ironically, on top of that from franchises...but you can make a D&D franchise with a well thought out game...CoD, GH, etc.).

DS3 is created by a US company, funded by an Asian company, and available in Europe first. No spoiler tags in this forum apparently, still haven't gotten the game (have it preordered for tomorrow's release in the US) and I already read about the end quests. Even though created in the US, the US get's it last this time around I guess. All Americans who are planning on getting it tomorrow...sign on here and show me group support!

LOL. great reply. I've learned that cages are crates! Does that mean barrels can be crates too?

Oh? I mean seriously, the reason most people buy the boxed, physical copies of these games is so they don't have to download so much, they expect to install most or all of it from the disc I always thought it was because some people liked to own something physical. I guess it sucks for NZ. Sucks for everywhere...why do you think consoles started getting REALLY popular over the past decade. As DRM came on strong, and hardcopies disappeared (having to d/l a game after you buy a supposed hard copy on a DVD or CD in the store isn't really a hardcopy) the only way to really have hardcopies of games (except for a few publishers who still are gamers making games FOR gamers) is to buy on console. This started happening 5 years ago however, and has been growing ever since. Most of the time hardcopy for PC is a joke now days...as in hardcopies don't exist.

As is all the flailing around about the differences between DS2 and DS3. I would imagine that would be point made if you actually feel that way?

All these replies about how much DS2 was like DS1, must not have been in the furor over DS2's differences. DS1 I mocked when it first came out, though I do admit the MP was pretty good for those that liked it. DS2 was totally a Diablo2 ripoff, but perhaps the best one of them ever made. It had more similarities with Diablo2 than the original DS1. I loved DS2. That game was awesome. But the copied and pasted Diablo 2 almost to some of the pieces of the story line even. DS1 was rightfully called the game that played itself. DS2 at least had some evidence of you having to make choices and play. The changes were pretty drastic. There are probably more similarities between CoD and Battlefield games than DS1 and DS2 (you probably should think that over before simply saying that's a false...you might surprise yourself with how much more similar CoD and Battlefield are than at first glance). I remember DS1 fanatics thrashing on DS2 for the differences when it came out, and a whole bunch of them swearing so many things against it, the entire commentary about DNF vs. the original DN, or even what we've seen thus far with those crying foul about DS3 vs. the other DS games...pales in comparison. For those who claim it wasn't so, I'd say you weren't there...or you have a short memory.

Alice is gonna rock. Especially since I have the game pre-ordered. YEEAAAAHHH. PSM gave it a poor review too. I set mine to download from Origin earlier. So it's too late for me to back out. I just hope that my opinion will be higher than theirs. Not sure what people were expecting, really. The first game wasn't exactly OMGWTFBBQ!!!11!! by any means. It stood out not by its gameplay and level design, which were both mediocre at best, but by the art direction, sardonic humour and unique take on Wonderland. If Madness Returns can deliver the same, it will be worth my money. I'd say that's dead on about the original. It was the unique take on the story and it's presentation that was the attraction to it. I didn't actually think it was that big a hit, so a sequel is sort of a surprise. Not my type of game, but if it recaptures the attitude of the original I expect it should appeal to the fans of the original.

The entire gameplay was different...but I suppose you can try to ignore that difference between DS1 and DS2. DS2 only had it so that you could have multiple people in a party...other than that the entire gameplay was more Diablo 2 than Dungeon Siege 1. Even the skill system of DS2 was like D2. Then you go to the story, and the story was even fashioned a little after D2 and had more similarities than DS1, DS2 was a dark fantasy inclusive of the end overall. As for the planet, I live on planet Earth. You?

DS2 was NOTHING like DS1 really. Why should I expect DS3 to be like DS1? Should I expect it to be like DS2? I'm just hoping it's a fun ARPG that has some semblance to following the world of the first two. From what I've seen it looks like it could be pretty good. I'm unsure where all these detractors are coming from, but I'm still pretty hyped about DS3. DS2 is perhaps my second all time favorite PC action RPG game (Diablo 2 taking first), DS1 isn't even in the top ten, but I still have the game and play it occasionally. I'd say I was a DS fan, but I haven't seen anything thus far to bring on the hatred of DS3 like I've seen exhibited. Thus far all I've seen shows great promise for the game.

Hmm, where to start... Whereas the other games put you into a rather find super cool weapons and armor...this game has it where the super weapons and stuff aren't as random nor as frequent. It stated that the monsters would drop their gear, and this is true...but what they have is what they drop...which means I get ten thousand rusty swords at the start (slight exaggeration) for every mystical one or upgraded one I get. The leveling doesn't really hit as significant as Diablo (it's DEEPER and MORE INTENSE fans will say), but didn't strike me in any way. However, the biggest sin...and this is the REAL reason...is because it was boring. I can't really say why it was boring. A lot of the Diablo Copycats are boring, even if they have all the telltale signs such as item drops, the similar leveling, etc. I got bored within the first three hours, and I kept pressing on hoping that it would get better. It didn't. It was sooooo very boring to play that I really had to say it was a waste of time. The same would go for other Diablo clones I played such as throne of Darkness, Nox...etc. Most Diablo thrones don't impress me much. I didn't even like the original Sacred (though Sacred 2 was okay on the PS3 simply because it was so sandbox, but otherwise was also rather boring). In truth the only ones that I enjoyed I listed above, simply because somehow they replicated fun...while most clones don't.

AP forums are a nice place if compared to DS3 forums I still find it ridicilous that as sucky sp game as original DS has so many "hc" followers. I wonder if this is how Bethesda board members felt like when Fallout 3 came out DS2 was awesome!? Though DS1 had better multiplayer and a completely wondrous theme.

Only one small reason why consoles have become dominant lately. Because DRM drove me out of the PC market. They treated the legal customers like the criminals, and the criminals were let to have free reign. I still play PC games, just not ones which have DRM. So I play mostly on the PS3 these days...it doesn't have to be hooked up to the internet just to let me play a game. I'd go back to PC as my main game platform in an instant if a majority of games started coming out without requiring internet to play (that includes the stupid authentications, buying a disk just to have to d/l the game anyways...etc.). I'm not an MMORPG player...don't like being treated like one.

Where? Torrent sites, I presume, since the release date is not until next week in Europe and the week after in NA. You suck. Hopefully that doesn't kick me from the forum...but you get my hopes up, I'm like...WHERE...WHERE! and then I find out that it isn't actually available...at least from legitimate channels which I'd go through. On more ironic news...I suppose this shows how stupid DRM is once again. DRM for something that may be popular is like throwing a challenge to the Hackers to hack the game. The quicker they do it, the more they can flaunt it. If this game doesn't sell as well as they think it should, I'm betting they'll blame it on this, even though most people like me weren't even going to buy it on PC in the first place...NOT because it get's pirated...but because the DRM causes too much hassle for legitimate buyers. I am getting it for PS3 though...hardcopy doesn't force me to be connected to an internet just to play or authenticate that yes...this thing that I bought in a store that should be proof enough that I got it legitimately is actually...gasp...legitimate. It's not like the Pirates are going to use their game to be authenticated or anything via DRM. (Duke Nukem Forever was even more ironic, in pointing out what I've already stated before, Piracy is actually easier and more rampant on the consoles...DNF came out first for them in the piracy game if I read the articles correctly). So...another week and a half to go before I can actually get DS3. Still waiting. Some times it sucks to be a legal and lawful game player...I wait for a game and hope it's not going to have some copy protection screw me, while all the pirating kids get to play.

I had no problems with TitanQuest, but I disagree with the idea that it was the Best Diablo since Diablo...it was one of the worst in my opinion. Dungeon Siege 2 was probably closest to being the best in my opinion. Then comes Torchlight 2. Fate was far better than Titan Quest. If you go consoles, BG:DA 1, BGDA 2, Champion of Norath, X-men legends, X-men legends 2, Marvel Ultimate Alliance, Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2, and Justice League Heroes (though some with different themes than straight fantasy of Diablo) were ALL better then TQ by far, and some on par with the original Diablo and Diablo 2. I finally got Titanquest when it was 10 USD for it and the expansion, just to see if it was any good (tried the Demo and was definately NOT impressed). In my opinion, the reason Titanquest didn't sell as well as this guy thought it was, is because IT STUNK!!! If many were like me, it simply wasn't that good of a game...period. I thought so from the Demo, and when I got the full game because so many claimed it was so great...it wasn't. It still stunk, just now I had a useless CD that I'd never play. I didn't even hear about bugs, that's how uninterested in the game I was. The guy is complaining because I would hazard a majority of the Diablo player type crowd thought TQ was junk...not because of any bug heresay they got from pirates. We didn't buy it because we didn't like what we saw in the first place from the actual sellers of the game. Of course I still hear those who love TQ, but from what the guy is saying about how it didn't sell as well as they thought it would, tells me perhaps there are more who share my opinion of the game than I previously thought, they just aren't as vocal as many forumgoers.

No cover system = fail Just because you don't know how to get behind objects doesn't mean there is no cover. Cover old school! PS: Max Payne still rocks. It's not just the bullet time, it's not just the shooting...it's the story and the dialogue that made the game what it is.

Wow, my excitement rose to unexpected levels, and then was killed and died, all of that within two posts. Daggerdale...pah! Gamma World would rock... Bedlam...after seeing what they did with Daggerdale...not so much.

I admit, I like a lot of the Sci-fi or space opera and Fantasy books. I enjoyed shannara a lot, I enjoyed dragonlance a lot, I enjoyed Thomas Covenant a lot, I even enjoy someo fthe T$R books and I do enjoy the Drizzt books (at least up until 1000 Orcs...then it started to go downhill fast). I enjoy Asimov, I enjoy heinlein, I enjoy some of the older Sci-Fi authors. I don't enjoy most of the stuff these days. It seems they try to put in so much sex...and more sex...and more sex that it seems unappealing to me. I never was into the romance books, and trying to integrate that idea into the fantasy books these days really doesn't float my boat. I haven't read A game of thrones, or Tad Williams (actually tried some Williams, but his stuff was rather disgusting in some ways in regards to sexuality). I suppose you could claim that Donaldson's books are absolutely the worst offenders in these realms, but unlike most of the quacks, Donaldson is actually one of the best writers I've ever read. I have tried some of the new writings...and most of them aren't written enough to overlook their fetish fascination with sexual deviations and sex thrown in simply to have sex in the books. I suppose I've read Herbert as well... So, with a Song of Fire and Ice, really isn't my boat of tea. I do like that older fantasy style which some don't like...but with the trash that comes out these days...I find I normally will read other genres before I touch the stuff that is the fromance (fantasy romance, or is that fantasy rape and manipulative sex?) that seems to be so popular these days.