greylord

That's a BIG area that DS1 beat DS2 hands down in (IN MY OPINION) was music. The DS1 theme was awesome, and overall the music was great to play to.

Yup, see: www.ageofempiresonline.com I played the demo at the gamescom, the gameplay is exactly like AoE2, 4 resources (stone is back) and gather points are in use again, and you can garrison units in towers :D. But we are getting offtopic now! True, but it sounds interesting what you are bringing up. Back on topic, I liked DS1 and DS2. I don't feel DS2 destroyed the franchise, and in fact feel it built it to be better for the SP portion. There are some things I probably would have changed for the MP portion, but I still think it was a really good game.

I have NO PROBLEM with the Way ME2 or DA:O handled things. I DO have a problem with the way THQ is stating how they would handle it. Though people here have said housing is not like games, they are missing the point...as is the Video game industry. If THQ has a problem, the solution isn't to try to cry in their soup about property being sold second hand. The solution is simply TO DO WHAT EVERY FREAKING OTHER PROPERTY sales do. That's right...whether it's cars, houses, DVD's, and even games...other companies who sell retail and firsthand, have decided to sell secondhand...even thirdhand and so forth. That's what Gamestop does. They said, hey, it works with housing, it works with cars...it worked with CD's and Video tapes (it started before Gamestop, EB games if any one remembers them), why not Videogames as well? So if THQ has a problem, the solution is simple. They get into the secondhand game market themselves, and undersell everyone else. It's called...hold for it...hold for it...Capitalism. There is NOTHING stopping THQ from getting into the second hand game market. Online retailers have already done so, such as Amazon. All THQ has to do is say...hey, if you buy a hard copy of our game, and get tired of it, send it in and WE'LL GIVE YOU MONEY (or credits on our online service, or whatever). In fact, if they have special incentives via online for people who sell them their games back... I'm pretty certain they could beat out Gamestop or whatever. Then they could rake in all that "fat cash" now couldn't they. IN fact, instead of whining about why someone is going to buy a second hand copy of a game THEY NO LONGER EVEN PUBLISH...they can buy the game back and then sell it to me for less then Gamestop! But...then they might have to actually worry about the customer...oh dear. So instead they'll cry into their soup because they don't want to try to get into a game which they are already positioned to beat out Gamestop with their own games any day of the week if they so choose...and instead complain instead of actually helping their customers...and helping themselves. Sorry if I don't feel any pity towards a group that want to try to punish their customers instead of looking for a solution that would be nice for the customer and even make them money (if what they claim about second hand games making so much is true), for a little more work on their part. Then again, maybe that's what the problem is...they don't want to hire a representative like the people in gamestop who buy your games...they don't want to really spend the effort or work to get that money...they just want the money for free instead.

Houses go up in price in the US...but not everyplace. How about a copy of Axis and Allies 50th edition. That's a boardgame...but it's a game. Many would say boardgames are even less value then video games. How about a real copy of Merchant of Venus...or better yet, Star Wars: The Queen's Gambit. The reason houses go up in value is the entire reason games also cost as they do. People on this thread want us to believe the Gamestop get's a 500% markup on second hand games, (Note also, that I don't believe that and stated it already) that they make 500% more than the game originally is worth...which would actually put the games at a MUCH HIGHER value than any house I've ever seen marked up in that short of a time period...even in the US. SOOOO, for those saying that...housing is more than appropriate. (and in the US currently, the housing market has actually crashed...so typically a house you bought 5 years ago is actually going to be worth 20% less or even worse than that in some areas). Even without, when you accept property in general (whether games, books, autos, etc.) it's worth is determined by buyers and sellers...whether property...or Video Games. This is why some games are worth a lot...and many aren't. The entire thing about second hand applying to one set of property but not another is rather absurd...it's all property...and it's value is decided by those buying. Similar principles apply to them as well. This is why the housing market in the US has had a reduction in prices...people are not willing to buy as many or pay as much as they used to. The basic ideas of capitalism apply. What companies are attempting to do is to create a rental model instead of a Buying model. The rental model is already in works with the MMORPG concept in general. Then there's the communities (home owners association), which is another idea being incorporated, where you buy a house, but it's in a community with rules and that you constantly have to pay an association an annual amount, which I see more like Steam. You pay to get games, and then to get benefits and other items, you must pay more money. Basic ideas already in usage elsewhere...but adapting to the housing market. It's all property...I personally like to own rather than to rent though...but some companies want to kind of keep you on a situation where it's none of the above. You buy the house...but it's only temporary...because if the realtor ever goes under...you are kicked out (Ubisoft I'm looking at you). That's the type of property that's poison.

Isn't that what we are discussing. Vendors who sell new property...and then are unhappy when the buyers resell it, but the original Vendors don't get any of the money even though the original Vendors didn't lift a finger to do anything more to add or even earn any more money from it? Houses are an investment, games are not. Houses actually appreciate over time rather than depreciate like games or 90% of the other things that are mentioned in this thread. Thus you're using quite possibly the absolute WORST analogy for this particular discussion. Why do houses increase in value? I have some star trek games people for some odd reason were willing to pay MORE then what I got them for...they apparantly appreciated in value. Was it the same reason? Both are property. Both are designed before being created. Both are then built on a framework and developed. Then both are sold to a buyer. It's the sellers and buyers that determine the market. According to what some are saying here, the value of a videogame being sold second hand rises 500%, or that's the profits that are made (which is actually quite ridiculous. GS buys the game and then turns around and sells it, which is true, but the profits come from people willing to trade in a game for 50% of what Gamespot is going to turn around and sell it for...ONCE...which then the second hand buyer can keep it, or sell it, or whatever, just like someone who has gotten other property...in this case...a house). Perhaps if the people who create the property don't like how it goes second hand, they should get into the deal by dealing in second hand properties themselves. Believe it or not there are Companies that not only build houses, but deal in secondhand sales of them (and third hand sales, and fourth hand sales...and so on) as well. Property is property...or would you rather start talking about something else that is property (at least taxes say they are in some states), automobiles... Same thing applies to them as well...except on a much more extreme level. Toyota for example, was still held accountable for it's mistakes...EVEN WITH SECOND/THIRD/FOURTH/FIFTH hand owners...and so forth. Shame if THQ suddenly had to realize that they were actually no better then anyone else who makes something and then sells it.

Isn't that what we are discussing. Vendors who sell new property...and then are unhappy when the buyers resell it, but the original Vendors don't get any of the money even though the original Vendors didn't lift a finger to do anything more to add or even earn any more money from it?

I"ve found out in this thread there are two types of people. Those who feel like they stole land and houses, and those who feel people should be able to sell their land or houses after it's been bought the first time. The first set feels like unless you buy it new...then you've stolen it. Unfortunately, land is never new, so if they own their own house, at least the land is STOLEN LAND!!! They never paid the first person ever to own it!!!!! I guess since land and houses are much more expensive and take a lot more time overall to make than many copies of a computer game, they are pretty bad thieves. The rest of us just feel that's stupid logic and go ahead and have no qualms with second hand land or houses. I hear there were those that were really trying to make killer profits on second hand land and houses however, always selling it for even MORE then what they got it for...I guess that really just made the first set unhappy because all these people were stealing the houses from the original builders. I on the otherhand am just amazed at how far people will go to try to say that houses bought second, third, or fourth hand are stolen as if that makes any sense at all. The original builders already sold the house, they made the money which they charged for it. Most of them are satisfied at that. It's not like they put any more effort into it beyond their inital building to be able to claim they should make even MORE than what they originally charged it for. In fact after they sell it, they don't do anything more with it to deserve a mark up from what THEY CHOSE TO SELL IT FOR. On the otherhand, if it's a faulty construction, they can be held liable for building something that could cause injury or death on purpose. Even if it's a second hand house...or occasionally a third hand house if it's soon enough. That seems common sense to the second crowd I'm part of. The first crowd however, who thinks people steal houses, are outraged. Afterall, the builder didn't sell it to the second buyers, who cares about them right. The builders shouldn't care about what they made, or worry about any deathtraps they made. Builders in fact should never build houses again, they should merely rent them out...and ensure NO ONE can ever have a house again according to their logic. My oh my...this thread has been an interesting one about houses...I just don't get that first crowd that claims I stole them. However, THQ, someone who used to be a big realtor on the block, but now only rents their homes, feels as if I have stolen something from them as well...which mystifies me. Well, they can say what they want in the US, it's a free country...but if they come to try to take their house back...I'm going to call the cops.

His method of coping is more interesting than what he did? That is a terribly sad and horrible story. That destroyed my day. Maybe that would have been better in General or something. I'm aghast at how it was just sort of glazed over here too. That's simply put, a horrendous and horrible thing to have happen. The boy was very callous about it from how it's written as well. I'm shocked...and disturbed. That's terrible. I guess in some ways it's a look into the mind of a murderer, and I find it's disturbing.

For many it won't even start. That's pretty bad. Other's who can get it to start get a white screen, or the computer controlled enemies don't do anything, or don't expand...and only 1 in 5 battles work for some reviewers. Part of the reason is that some retailers broke the sale date and started selling early so Stardock released a gold master version of the game on site early. They patched it pretty quick to try to bring it up to version 0, and that first intermittent temporary patch actually was okay for fixing some of the problems. Then they released another patch and that one seems to have recurred most of the problems of the original release. They have come out and theorized that some of the problems are from a mix of 64 bit Win 7 and Ati cards, which they have been able to reproduce. They are listening to the reports and trying to reproduce the problems, so hopefully should have it all good pretty soon. It means that you probably will get the better copy if you have downloaded the copy from them rather then the hardcopy version in the store that was released early? I had forgotten the game released this week, otherwise I probably would have been in the pre-release trying to get the game to work as well. However, with their stance on Gamer rights, as well as their talking to the fans and buyers of the game (which is always a good sign when you have the developers and designers intermingling with the others, which is also a good thing about Obsidian) keeping them informed what they've found and what they are working on for the patches, means that I'll still support them despite the buggy original release.

THQ seems at the forefront of the persecution of gamers in recent years...which is sad. I was quite the fan of theirs...when they actually stood up for the little man and the gamer in me. Ironically they were the ones that led the charge turning me from the light side to the dark side (no, I don't pirate...I mean from PC gaming to console gaming). On the opposite end of this entire cheating thing THQ is over...you have stardock's latest release. There has been some flak over stardock's latest game release...Elemental. It's convinced me WHY I'm thinking PCgamer and so much of the PC game industry is out of touch with those who play games, and why consoles are growing larger and larger in sales...whilst PC gaming is taking a back seat. One of the big things is something that you don't find everywhere, but you'll find from Stardock, and from Obsidian. They actually TALK to their fans. That's right, you can find people who work on the actual games in their forums and in their communications...even if it's just occasionally. Most places have some lacky called human resources or something that has NO idea about computers or the programming of a game to respond now days...or even worse...no one at all. I used to be a hardcore PCgamer, and a hardcore PC Gamer magazine reader. In the past year I've let my subscription drop, and as many know, I'm actually more of a console gamer now than a PC gamer. I don't have to worry about being online as a console gamer for starters...and the entire flap of THQ's idea that I'm cheating them by buying a second hand game (which normally means I either thought the game was not good enough to buy at their prices to begin with so they didn't lose anything that way...OR they stopped publishing the game in a form that I can buy...so they don't get it from me that way either) makes me think that something like Stardock's Gamers Bill of Rights should be made law instead of just a stance. It would be nice if companies had to start thinking about their customers instead of simple advertising and the bottom line. Anyways this is the other item that means that despite any qualms some people are making about Elemental, now that I've been reminded it's out...despite the bugs...I'm buying it. http://www.gamersbillofrights.org/ Now it should be interesting how Stardock responds to #1 of the gamer rights with the latest release of Elemental... However, THQ it appears doesn't like #10 #10 Gamers shall have the right to sell or transfer the ownership of a physical copy of a game they own to another person. I see it as fundamental as anything else...such as books, dvd's, cars, etc. Thank goodness the console market is still sane (and by the way, I actually rarely sell my games either, but occasionally I'll find out about some older game that is no longer published...if it weren't for the second hand copies...I'd have never gotten them to be able to play them!).

Well, then perhaps someone should call THQ and ask them why they are polluting the environment and are anti-green. Ask them why they want to destroy the earth so much that they have turned anti-green earth. Apart from that, they were anti-recycling a while ago...they require their games to be authenticated already via steam for the one copy per customer...so meh...nothing really new. It isn't like someone is going to buy WHDoW2 used since it would be useless anyways.

Severed hand, wasn't that in the IWII as well? I have to admit it's been awhile since I played through them.

I actually thought DS2 was one of the best games of it's kind to come out.

That's because you are seeing it as a Massively Multiplayer Online game...correct? But with the way Blizzard did Starcraft, with forcing you to authenticate online, and then you have to ensure you check in online at least once every 30 days, they only need a tweak and then they can guarantee that just to play you have to be online for the SP campaign. Some people worry Blizzard are going to do that for their next games...sort of like Ubisoft. So if you have a TON of people playing SP online, what do you call it. I guess since it's strictly NOT Multiplayer... Maybe Massively Online game? What do you call Assassin's Creed 2? It's an SP game, but you have to be online just like an MMO to play. Maybe a Massively Online RPG or MORPG or maybe a MORTS (RPG or RTS) when playing Single Player? PS: I'm not seeing DA2 as having any real aspects connected to MMORPGs. For starters I expect that changes I make to the world could actually make changes to the world instead of reverting back to what they were five minutes later.

Maybe I misunderstand Hardcore, but with him wounded, why the frick didn't you rest in the Tower when you had the chance before going to explore? Resurrect the poor lad, he shouldn't have to suffer because he was part of the no resting gang...

+1 +1 +1 +1 . . . +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 =664 I think, that's a lot of 1's to add up. if it were two more that could be bad luck! Maybe I miscounted and it is actually 666?

That's fine with me. They are making similar games to what they made originally (diablo was actually originally these guy's baby, before they fell under Blizzard's wing). I am pretty excited about Torchlight 2, just hope they don't have the flayer jungle area. Torchlight 3 will be the MMORPG I'm thinking.

Awesome! Are they now? I dunno, I'm not good enough to decide, but it seems to be the concencus that Terran are overpowered and Zerg are underpowered. This seems to be supported by how few Zerg players there are in higher levels. I'm just relaying what I got from people discussing it though, but it's being said that the problem is that the Terran can counter pretty much everything while the Zerg have at the most two or three plausible army compositions that can actually survive, and only if they're lucky. I think there are more Terrans overall because that's what people start off with in the campaign, and what they get used to the most at first. SC2 has different strategies and since you get used to what strengths and weaknesses the Terrans have first, it makes it easier to excel with them. The Zerg and Protoss don't have the same advantages. I might actually put Protoss a little ahead of the rest...Terrans it's hard to determine with the fact that they are the only SP campaign people can even play in the first place. I might think that the Zerg are underpowered as well however...despite all that.

The thing is that adding super nice graphics to a turn based games just makes the ridiculousness of "you hit me - I hit you" so much more obvious. Which is probably part of the reason why they have gone on to handhelds and the scary void of indie PC rpgs. Since no one has really managed to make a turn based game "exciting" without losing the turn-basedness, we won't probably be seeing any AAA releases in that category, unless it's some weird card or puzzle game. Actually turn-based RPGs ARE being made for a console, the PS3. However the current trend with turn based RPG's is to have each character have a turn, and then have them either have action points or take actions over a specific time with the turn. Resonance of Fate was one I played recently that was pretty good in this aspect. I didn't quite like Trinity Universe, but that was another one of these types of games. Resonance of Fate had pretty good graphics as far as I'm concerned.

Awesome, thanks

Of interest, they mention this coming to console from a PC game, but they actually made a console DS game previously. I have it. It's for my PSP. Thanks for the link.

I think it's pretty impossible to enjoy DAO if you hate its combat... unless you're one of those scary people that have been trained by the market to enjoy badly written self-indulgent Disney-romance-meets-fantasy-with-an-epic-complex. I mean, I thought the setting was pretty nice and there were a lot of things to do in the world, but ultimately for me it's a hearty fighting-in-tunnels affair. Which is why the possible removal of topdownview sucks so much. Press Release + Awkward 'Cool' = Games Journalism! It's like real journalism but better because it's not stuffy. I guess I must be trained by the market then. I did enjoy the combat however, but even without it I think I would have enjoyed the game overall.

I already have ME2 for the PC. I do like games on the PS3 though, but if they are going to release ME2 for the PS3, let them have some way of having ME1 for the PS3 as well, preferably in the same bundle. Or have SOME incentive for people who already own (for PC or Xbox360) it to get it again for their PS3.

I want the teleport. Even DS1 had teleport towers. I think it would be ultimately stupid to remove teleport, and would cause all sorts of complaints in the forums. My two cents.

I was under the impression it was called Origins because it was the origin of what comes next, such as BG1 was the origin story of what was a more epic story of BG2. I never really thought it was called origins because you could have different origin beginnings in the game, but because the entire game was the origin of the series.