greylord

that really doesn't look like my type of game from what they show on the site.

If you care about your old stuff, you still have a functioning PSX. If you can't be bothered to bring it out when you want to play it, then I guess that says a lot about your personality... I also have not just one but two functionn PS1/PSX. Maybe it says a lot about my personality that I don't want to be bothered to bring it out if I don't have to, but I don't. That's one reason why I have the PS3 with backwards compatibility for PS1 and PS2 games. I only need room for one console, blu-ray/dvd player, and even browser on the internet if I want. It's called economy of space. I also like to keep my discs in pristine condition if I can. The better you keep care of your stuff, normally the longer it remains good and working. That's my take. If you don't take care of your stuff, that's okay as well. I'm not certain why I or someone else should judge others on that factor. I would be upset if someone got into my discs and scratched them all up, but if it's theirs...they can do what they want with them. However, WHY I would want something with Backwards compatibility is normally economy of space for me. I still probably will eventually end up getting a PS4.

I run a minimal machine, meaning I kill any program not currently needed. Steam is just an added program that insist on running for no purpose normally...even offline mode, steam doesn't normally need to come up just to run a game...they just put it in. Same goes for many other install programs though, but like someone said, GoG is still the way to go on the d/l front IMO. Less intrusive overall. They may not have as large a selection, but they don't make intrusion part of their business model. I also am a console gamer, even the PSN doesn't require to be on to be in "offline" mode. It also has similar items as steam as I recently had a PS3 die on me, and I was able to redownload everything lost on that PS3 to a new PS3. Even the PSN, XBL and the console download programs overall are friendlier than Steam but offer similar services. Of course XBL costs more so I suppose you could consider that a detriment and Steam may be better than that. I'm just annoyed at STEAM running in the background as I am a minimalist as far as computer programs running.

I heard that it expands some of the ending in our understanding, as well as missions which could involve other characters?

I already have a copy I play at home. However I travel...AND...I bring my PS3 with me. I saw DS3 for sale for 7.75...at that price...I said...why not. So I got an extra disc to take with me on my travels. I already have a copy...getting another copy just so I could play it when travelling... Yes...I suppose it was stupid of me looking back. People will look and say...why the heck did you get two copies...just bring your original with you. But, stupidly I don't want to chance loosing a copy (those baggage handlers and security folks, you know how you seem to lose something everytime they shuffle through your pack)...so I got an extra copy just for travelling. Oh well...dumb of me I guess...but it WAS only 7.75 for the second copy. Too good to pass up for a travel copy for me. Anyone else occasionally pick up second copies?

We'll see where it goes.

No it won't because Sony is not exactly in good financial shape and they need to cut cost wherever possible. Creating a PS2 emulator and then providing support would not make any business sense for Sony. That's why they'll use Gaikai streaming. They won't make much profits from the hardware itself, so they now need to make money of services and digital. Sooner or later, they're gonna provide PS1/2/3 streaming on PCs, tablets etc too because it creates more revenues. They have to. Money speaks louder than exclusivity. They already have PS1 and PS2 emulator that they have used in the past. The PS1 they used with the PS2 and the PS3, so I imagine it wouldn't cost much to transfer over. PS2 has been for the PS3 and currently was a software version. On the otherhand, you're right, streaming could be much more profitable for them.

I'll say it again, PC gaming compared to what it was, is dead. Many who try to say it isn't, try to incorporate Ipad, smart phones and tablets into the PC gaming market... They aren't PC's. Never were. Remember, SE had 3.5 billion in sales...the 1.5 was specifying in certain areas. Once again, that's ONE company of MANY of the Console games. Yes, I'm a console gamer...and to tell the truth, maybe it's associations, but I really don't know that many PC gamers except for those online. On the otherhand, I know TONS of console gamers. Consoles ALSO have downloads like steam...but also have retail and other avenues. I suppose if you count casual games (not what people normally consider the old venues of PC gaming) You DO have a much better picture, and in that case it isn't dying per se. However, it's not the PC gaming that everyone talks about here and it's not the types of games typically played on consoles. But if you like FB games and the such...it IS a good time to be a PC gamer.

I'd say it's higher than you think. The more apt thing to say is the less the a billion sales that still play games that are on STEAM don't give a **** about steam. The several billions of dollars of sales that have departed from PC sales and gone elsewhere apparantly DID care some **** about not just STEAM, but DRM and other aspects.

I suppose my take is if marriage is a religious thing, leave religion to be religion. If homosexuals have their own church that does homosexual marriages and calls it such, let them have it. If heterosexuals have thier own church that does heterosexual marriages and calls it such, let them have it. Neither should dictate to the other what they have to do within the dictates of their own religion. I would apply the same to religious grounds. That's private/religion's property...hence the Olive Grove item. I consider that intrusion. By the same right, have a Westboro church being on the same grounds as a homosexual burial where they are on religious ground may also be considered an intrusion (and rude to boot). With government, I'm opposite. Get the heck out of the marriage thing...the ONLY reason that the Homosexual leadership even chose the term was because it was inflammatory and got attention. I think it was stupid and foolish and made a LOT more enemies then they should have. The approach they should have taken was similar to the path previously taken by the leadership which were equal but different...aka...they would be called civil unions but the rights would be the exact same as given to the religiously joined folks, if they wanted to go that way. It doesn't offend as many because it's not getting in the way of that entire religious debate (side steps it to a degree, you'll still have the opposers, but it isn't as inflammatory) while at the same time getting what is needed. On that point, get out of any and all marriages for the govt. Instead, if it's a legal joint contact between two persons, make it such, and call it a joint contract. Let religions do their marriages and let whoever wants to be joined be joined by whatever term they call it. Get out of the religion business and let everyone do what they choose in the bedroom without anyone else putting their nose into it (the choose what they do in the bedroom is basically slang for...I don't care what you do sexually as long as you don't intrude on me, and I won't intrude on you with my sexuality or choices either type mindset). What I'm opposed to is that the some of the leadership (not all) seems to be hellbent right now on forcing it with the idea that after that they can use that as stepping stone later to force court cases upon religions as has been done in some areas...basically forcing them into acceptance regardless of belief. I don't really give a flying you know what if the Catholics approve of my choices in that arena or not, and I personally don't care what their thoughts are. I say let everyone do as they wish and let others do it...but this entire agenda of trying to force others...you can't do that overall. It's only going to cause hard feelings and make more opposition then it has already (once again in my opinion). It's polarizing and makes people hate more than anything else. I personally think the better option, at least in the US, is to let people do as they desire and keep out of their own private concerns. I don't recall the US Constitution having ANYTHING to do with specifying the govt.'s involvement with marriage...if it has to be something, leave it to the states and get out of the marriage business altogether. If a legality has to be done, have it as a legal contract of joint unity between people (heck, if the Mormons want to start having polygamy, let them...if others want polysandry...let them...as long as they dont force it on me...I don't really care...). It doesn't just apply to a homosexual/heterosexual thing, it extends FAR beyond that. I say, if it's not ultimately harmful to children or others...let them do whatever they want...and let them practice their religion as they so desire or...non-religion as they so desire. Of course, as if it had to be said, in my opinion.

I remember that one. That was a great game.

No. RTS is in decline because almost noone could compete with Starcraft II in terms of quality and support. RTS were never popular on consoles, like grand strategies and wargames. After Electronic Arts killed Red Alert franchize there's no competition for SC2 in RTS sector. That's because no one is really MAKING RTS games overall right now. I think C&C was competitive up until EA required you to register it online and be online. That sort of was a big chunk of a killer. DoW, at least the original was highly popular. SotS empire, by the guy I think who gave the interview was somewhat popular. Heck several were popular right up until they started requiring the DRM, online thing. Age of Empires, Rise of Nations, and others were popular enough. IN MY OPINION...DRM killed PC gaming. OH, you still have a number that play PC games...but a majority have shifted like I did to consoles as we sort of like hardcopies of games without having to register online. Ironically (and VERY ironically, even if I still do PC gaming, just not like I used to and not like I do on consoles), for some odd reason I have no problem d/ling games in the same manner as one would with steam, just on a tablet instead. Same idea...but for some reason I have less problems doing it via tablet or app for a smart phone then I do for a PC. ODD...eh? But you are correct, RTS games were never popular on consoles. Consoles, despite what they consider slowing sales, currently rule the roost with the only contenders even somewhat making a showing being the tablets/Ipad/smartphone generation (PC really doesn't even come close from what I see at this point...sales wise).

The first one I played was Zork. I eventually played the Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance D&D PC games. didn't get too much into them though. The first one that I really enjoyed actually was on a Mac. It was a game called Dungeon of Doom. The first one on PC was actually Baldurs Gate (the original) Loved the way you could explore and find your way around....and die in the process. Later I also tried a game I think it was called Hillsfar...which was a Rogue like D&D game. Those two led me to the downhill slope of PC RPGs that I played and enjoyed.

You are right about your post not being popular, it smacks of bigotry . Are you opposed to 2 gay people walking the street and holding hands, I just want to understand what you mean by " they need to keep what they do in the bedroom". Also how do you feel about a gay person joining the army and fighting and dying for country. Should he be allowed to do that, maybe "he should just stay in the bedroom" ? Anyway go back to page two of this thread and read the excellent and informative post by Agx. You'll learn a few things, marriage was never about religion. It was about a social contract between people. So religion actually hijacked the definition of marriage. Therefore if want to leave marriage as it was gay people should be allowed to get married. I'd say let the gay person fight and die if they want. What I'm against is the actions that they have taken in some places once they get Gay Marriage as a term and approved by govt. They have in some locations then sued churches for not agreeing to marry them. THAT'S what I oppose. I oppose ANYONE who wants to try to force thier views on someone else. Some you can accuse of the scared of Homosexuality, but in some instances it's not scared of the sexuality, but scared because of actions taken elsewhere that they seem to desire to pursue. For Example An evangelical Christian marriage commissioner in Saskatchewan was successfully sued for refusing to marry a homosexual couple, despite assisting the couple by putting them in touch with another marriage commissioner who would be willing to conduct the ceremony. A campaign has now begun in Canada to remove tax-free status from churches that refuse to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. Some Canadian provinces are even considering laws to forbid teachers in private schools from teaching that traditional marriage is the ideal. Ocean Grove, a United Methodist Church in New Jersey, was successfully sued by a lesbian couple for not allowing them to be married on Ocean Grove’s grounds. The site in question is Ocean Groves’ seaside pavilion which is used in worship ceremonies. Ocean Grove argued under the First Amendment they have the right to not allow marriages they do not recognize on their grounds, the judge did not agree. Judge Solomon Metzger ruled Ocean Grove had to allow such marriages then went one step further and revoked Ocean Groves tax-exempt status on the pavilion and surrounding grounds. The tax-exempt status has since been re-instated for most of the grounds re-filed for the exemption. It's the examples that they are having in trying to FORCE their views on others. Why does it have to be called Gay -Marriage? Because that tears down the other religions and if you use a term they use...then maybe you can FORCE them to change their religion. I could care less what they do overall until it involves ME. If they want to hold hands...go right ahead. If they want to smooch, go right ahead. If they want to smooch me...well...I'm going to object to that one. They could call it whatever they want...the only reason for calling it Gay Marriage is political...AND purposefully to enrage or upset others. I think it's a stupid reason. I disagree with the leaders of that movement and their opinions on that matter. Another problem is that idiots who have NO idea what's going on in the Gay community assume that these Leaders (some of whom aren't even homosexual) speak for every homosexual or gay person out there. They don't, but those pushing this agenda DO have a political agenda in mind and most of the time it's trying to force an issue whether it needs to be or not. There are OTHER ways to accomplish similar ideas without resorting to what they are trying to do in a more offensive manner. Force is not the way to do anything in my opinion in this manner, and they ONLY make enemies of those who would not be enemies. I have several Homosexual family members, I don't begrudge them anything. Part of the problem is people taking offense where there is none offered. If they don't try to force themselves on me, I don't mind. It's when they DO, that I mind. Look at it this way. Recently there was a case where there was a heterosexual couple staying at a hotel. They were kicked out of the hotel. Why? Because the owner stated it was a homosexual hotel ONLY. If I stated it was a homosexual couple that was kicked out because of their sexuality...it probably would engender a LOT more outrage. Either way, it's still discrimination. However, if it's private property...then the owner should be allowed to do whatever the heck they want...if it's a business however...then screw it. Religion on the otherhand I think is a very personal and private thing. Trying to force your views into someone's personal life is just as terrible as someone trying to push their religious views on you. AS I said, keep their business to themselves and I don't have a problem, it's when they push it on me that I have a problem. As far as being bigoted... Do you even know if I'm homosexual or heterosexual. It's amazing what people assume.

It's actually common. We end up playing 4 hour designed modules sometimes for days...just depends how far off the deepend we go. On the module, it depends on how confident you are feeling as a GM right now. I'd go with either Council of Thieves of Rise of the Runelords...leaning more towards Rise of the Runelords. Kingmaker is absolutely awesome...but it will be more intensive on the DM than the others you list since it's more of a sandbox type module (meaning that the players are basically allowed to do just about whatever they want and you have to make stuff up on the fly to compensate). There is another module that's pretty straight forward that you could give a shot with, it would be an easier module probably due to it being made for 3.5 D&D (but other than that it's somewhat compatible) called Expedition to Castle Ravenloft. That module in many ways is a pretty straightforward railroad (meaning players typically go as per what the module tells you to send them). It's also open to making stuff up on the fly though if that's what you like to do...so easily expandable.

My own take is not popular. I have no problem with someone being hetero or homosexual. Keep their own nose in the bedroom and out of my face though. I am somewhat opposed to people and governments trying to purposefully change the definition of something that need not be changed...UNLESS the plan is to force religions to ACCEPT those and things that they are opposed to...aka...destroy freedom of religion. I am not opposed to government getting out of the marriage business...aka...leave it to each to determine whatever they want to do with their lives. Leave marriage as a Religious thing for the religions to dictate what they will or will not do. If they (governments) want to recognize something make it part of contract law in which two persons (no definition of who or what) can be joined for purposes of taxes and other legalities However, leave marriage and it's definitions as it was originally...a religious thing. If homosexuals THEN feel the need to have gay marriage once it has NO political force to be enforced against religions...fine...in fact, I think they should make their own church and have it perform Gay Marriages in it...maybe make it so that heterosexual marriages cannot be performed in that religion. That's fine with me... AS I said, keep what they do in the bedroom to themselves, let us keep it to ourselves, and let's not rub our collective noses up each other's rear ends or genitalia...whichever side you tend to be on.

I'd say it depends on how quickly that army moves to wireless communications and wireless control. Easiest methodology to defeat an army like that...stop ALL signals in the air...friendly, unfriendly, that should stop most things. Next, be willing to nuke your own soil and enemy troops on it. It would be a defensive use of nukes (thus far usage has all been offensive, and all plans are offensive plans). This creates an effective wall as well. They have to be willing to go through that wall in order to get to you...both bad and good things...but it creates an immovable obstacle. Next, get the best hackers in the world to do intel prior to invasion, hack the enemy govts. intel, power grid, communciations, and everything else. Secretly and simultaneously if possible, than hit it all in a total blackout when you hit them with invasion forces. Just some of my ideas...not that anyone would ever utilitze them.

Becoming an X-man is Rare? That's what happened to me! Of course I think the alternative lets you live longer. There's all these anti-mutant types that keep on trying to kill me.

Not initially at least, I think. But maybe 2-3 years down the road, both Sony/MS could decide to ship a new hardware SKU that comes without optical drive (price cut!), and also announcing btw that retail games won't be produced anymore due to the majority of demographics having fast enough internet. All games will then be bought exclusively in their respective online stores. Doing this at launch would be suicide, but as people get used to the idea they will eventually succumb to the corporate will. They always do. Sony already tried that once this generation (though it WAS advertised somewhat at launch, though the key system did have disc usage and then later they released the download only version). The PSP GO was a disaster. Don't think they'd make the same mistake this closely...but I could be mistaken. From what I was hearing it was that it would play used games...(though of course, as one brought up, it could require reactivation, I don't think it will considering other things they've stated...but I can't rule it out either). (edit: And seems clarified on that subject later in the thread...so...they won't require it, but it's still could be done by publishers). IT WILL NOT be backwards compatible with PS3 games from what I've seen. Maybe the games or some of them will be available via cloud gaming? But backwards compatible with PS3 I heard was not going to happen due to architecture. Maybe it will play PS1 and PS2 games?

On the otherhand, this could be the most exciting news...depending. Is it going to require you to always be online with your PS3. IF so it's a no go for many console goers...though knowing Blizzard they won't admit this, and won't actually tell anyone publically until they sold a million units the first day and get an outcry of rage on their forums where the official Blizzard response will be... Too bad...guess you just gotta play the way we want you to... On the otherhand, if it is OFFLINE, and allows coop offline with buddies on the couch... Expect major raging from the PC gamers (actually, I expect there is already raging on this matter)...but it will be completely AWESOME for console gamers. If it turns out it is offline...I'll buy 3 copies at least....

Well, I would tie this to a fact, that PC is: 1) More mod friendly 2) More Multiplayer and Social medium friendly In the past, the main driver towards the consoles was the fact that it's a single machine, with a single configuration, meaning that risks of game breaking bugs is minimal, and there is no need to constantly upgrade your machine for a next 4-5 years. With platforms like Steam (DRM excluded) PC is becoming very user friendly medium. We can have everything what consoles have and more. The trend might reverse though, if the new consoles will be truly NEXT-GEN Riiight. 1. RTS is dying because it's a PC thing, and unless you are using STEAM which used to be only 6% of PC sales until they KILLED retail PC sales by requiring STEAM and DRM and chasing us all onto consoles...there isn't any real options of playing most RTS games. Almost all RTS games released these days require some form of DRM (steam counts as DRM). That killed the PC market comparatively to what it was...which in turn has killed the RTS market. 2. Square is doing poorly. They had sales that were HIGHER this past year than the year previously. They only brought in a net of ~3.5 BILLION USD. That's $3,500,000,000.00 which...last I checked, is about more than the ENTIRE PC gaming market at this point. That's one company. Not all of a group, not even all of the Nintendo, or Sony or MS...one company that makes games. SE. The reason they are struggling is that their sales were only about 1.5 Bilion USD. That was severly hampered because they sunk a bucket ton of gold, savings, and money into a few games that NO ONE liked and hence NO ONE bought. It's like that Disney John Carter thing...hey, making 282 million USD is GREAT...until you realise you spent 250 million USD to produce it and another 100 million USD in advertising and promotion equaling a actual lose of 68 million. Same situation, they made a ton of money, but spent even more making the games...hence...the struggle. Their struggle in truth is because they made a cruddy game that no one liked...hence the tough console market. A market that still gave them over a Billion dollars in sales...for not that many games...

Cerberus and their "manpower" actually get a fairly cool explanation down the road. It's just a pity that it doesn't get teased at all, in fact the opposite: everybody seems to think that Cerberus having that type of ability is perfectly normal. US military is actually fairly unique in the sense that "marines" aren't simply a part of the navy. Shep is definitely a marine, just in a a military of that type. I think I missed It where they state how Cerberus get's so many men. If needed spoilers...how did they get what appears to be basically one of the most massive armies in the galaxy?

I thought Vol's comment was how he preferred Ander's Arse to Miranda's...which is why DA2 was so flamed in relation to the entire ME series???? I mean...he wasn't all that specific about which sex he was discussing and it IS a DA2 thread...

Forget boring "gun porn" I want bolter porn (don't know what that is...look it up...It's awesome!!!) Some of you will be disappointed though...you probably already have the wrong idea of what bolter porn is...