TMZuk

That's hard to answer. The Road Warrior, or Mad Max 2, as it was called here in Denmark, was a mind blowing experience in 1981. Fury Road is a mind blowing experience right now. Will is stand the test of time as well Mad Max 2 has? Only time can tell.

It was a tour de force! Fantastic. Best action movie since I don't know when! I watched Mad Max 2 in the cinema back in the day, and was blown away. This.... this is Mad Max taken to a new level. Salvador Dali and Hieronymius Bosch on drugs! Totally surreal. And totally worth the hype!

QFT.

That's because you weren't very familiar with mechanics. Now things like THAC0 are a no-brainer for you and now you'd spent on that staff less than a minute. Our previous experience leaves an imprint on our future; I doubt that there'll ever be better BG than BG(2). I was very familiar with the mechanics. I've played a lot of Ad&D. It was the fact that an enchanted weapon was a rarity and hard to come by, that made it interesting.

I don't disagree with that. but in BG and BG2 there was cool stuff to buy. And you didn't get rich that quick. Just getting money together to get some suits of plate for your fighters took time and effort.

So, the game sort of fizzled out for me, sometime during act 2. Oh, I am certain I'll pick it up again, but right now, I am on a break. There's a number of details in the game, that are disappointing. Most of them can be overlooked or ignored, e.g. the horrible load-times, the boring run-your-own-castle simulation and the fact that you can't buff up before a fight. But, there are two things that are really preventing me from enjoying the game the way I enjoyed and still enjoy BG and BG2. And that is crafting and companions. So why don't I like crafting and why not just ignore it? Well. That was my plan. Just ignore it. I've never liked crafting. The very idea of a warrior or a paladin or what have we, who is also a miner/herbalist/smelter/blacksmith/weapon-smith, have always irritated me no end, and struck me as silly and contrived. However, the way it's implemented in PoE makes it very hard to ignore. Do any of you remember the ~first~ magical weapon you found in BG? Mine was Silke's +1 quarterstaff. I spend an eternity - no pun intended - figuring out whether to have my own character use it, or give it to Jaheira. In PoE, you put some stuff on a sword, and there you go. So exciting. It makes the treasure you find boring and meaningless. Worse, it makes money equally pointless. Back to BG. Do any of you remember the treasure at the bottom of the Naskel Mines? The first really large treasure with several items and lots of money. Where I am now in PoE's Act 2, my character have got an absurd amount of money, enchanted weapons all around and nothing to spend the accumulated wealth on. Crafting! How I hate it! And on to companions. I mentioned Jaheira from BG. Bossy, irritating, meddling and utterly unforgettable. Her husband Khalid, the stuttering fighter. Viconia the evil drow. Imoen. Minsc. Dynaheir. Edwin. Xan the depressed mage. Xzar. Shar Teel. Well, Obsidian, I am sorry, but IMO you have created a dull, un-engaging and forgettable lot in comparison. PoE is not a bad game. Better than most of the travesties that goes under the name RPG today. But, it doesn't hold a candle to BG or BG2 either. And, IMO, crafting and boring companions must carry a lot of the blame.

I suppose settings and save-games are kept even after an uninstall. Many games do that. Anyway, you are welcome.

Go to Options, Game, and check Don't Restrict Stash.

Good mechanics? The AD&D rules had good mechanics? Right. Umberhulks? Have Jaheira summon a fire elemental and send that in. Maybe give it a mindward spell first. Sit back and wait, the umberhulks cannot harm a fire elemental. If silly stuff like that is why you people are crying over PoE, all the IE games had enough silly stuff, that you could write books about it. Doh!

I don't play MMORPGs.

It's a very good game. Like most Obsidian games it slowly sinks it's claws in me, unlike the instant "wauw" I used to get from Bioware. Back when Bioware made good games. But when Obsidian's games grab hold, they stay with me for a long time. Mask of the Betrayer was easily the best CRPG since BG2. Fallout: New Vegas was a Tour de Force. I expected it to be like that, and now... well into second act.... I'm hooked! A few things I could do without. Stronghold, crafting and pointless backer NPCs. The NPCs can be ignored but the silly names many of them have are irritating. When patch 1.05 is released, I'll give the IE mod a go. But, am I pleased? You bet I am.

In medieval Europe a brigandine was a poor man's plate armour. I assume that's what the game attempts to reflect. However, like all rpgs, the brigandine soon becomes pointless, because plate armour is readily available. Funny thing is that today a brigandine costs as much or maybe even more than plate armour does, because it's time consuming as what not to make it. Clearly, in the middle-ages, time was much less of an issue as the hourly wages were next to nothing. And it takes a lot more skill to produce a suit of plate.

If removing the swearing makes you happy, run with it. If you believe that swearing is what makes this game M-rated, you've got issues.

I'm forced reply to this. First of all, so far, after more than thirty hours, I have encountered ONE crash and no bugs of any consequence. Secondly, I played BG back in the day. Do you realize how many patches Bioware had to release for that game? Or for BG2? Or NWN? A truckload! It's getting tiresome reading posts like these. A game with so much content as this one is BOUND to have bugs. You want a bug free game? Don't play it from day one.

I'd like an option to sheathe weapons. Like NWN had. And I'd like an option to walk. And I'd like an option to disable names. If people do not like the word realism, then call it suspension of disbelief. In any case, I concur with OP.

Well, no game is ever going to be to my taste completely. I was sorely disappointed when crafting was made a stretch-goal. I dislike it with a vengeance, I fully expected to dislike it in this game, and I do. But, I'll live with it.

I'll add my voice to this. The last few months I've been playing a bit of BG/BG2 with the Big World mod and gotten into the feel of these games again. Then I got PoE up and running after coming home from work this afternoon. And It is just fantastic! The ~only~ thing I regret is that I have to go to bed now. Fifteen years ago, I'd have said screw that, and carried on playing all night through! Alas, no such excesses these days. So, good night and thank you very much, Obsidian. You've done great!

I'll add my voice to this. The last few months I've been playing a bit of BG/BG2 with the Big World mod and gotten into the feel of these games again. Then I got PoE up and running after coming home from work this afternoon. And It is just fantastic! The ~only~ thing I regret is that I have to go to bed now. Fifteen years ago, I'd have said screw that, and carried on playing all night through! Alas, no such excesses these days. So, good night and thank you very much, Obsidian. You've done great!

lolololololololololololololol Are you joking? I hope so... A high stress situation is not conducive to romance. I wonder what world you live in where people just get romantic when **** hits the fan. Bob: Jim! Them nazi's are firin' on our position! We need to find cover! Jim: BOB!!! I... love you! Let us embrace in passion. Bob: I'm not normally romantic, but according to TMZuk in high stress situations romance WILL happen. Jim and Bob were then gunned down by nazi's since people automatically fall in love in high stress situations. That why romance never occurs in a relaxed setting. That's why there's nothing more romantic than a war zone. That's why most romance stories are like the D-Day invasion. How romantic. Wanna acquire a spouse? Easy; get them alone and stress him/her out. Romance WILL happen. It's a fact! No, I am not joking. Nor am I replying with an incredibly immature lololol. And, unlike you, I know what I am talking about. First of all, Bob and Jim are both men. And not everyone is gay. Only about five percent or so. Secondly, and much more important, it doesn't happen when under fire. It happens afterwards, in between, when they survived and somebody else did not. When they escaped and somebody else did not. When they are on a high because they won. Or survived against all odds. Or got away, even if they should not have been able to. It happens when you are in a small group, fitted against the world. When it is "us" against the "rest". That is situations where close friendships are formed, where romance pops up and sexual tension is abundant. Here's something you may be aware off: Adrenaline is a drug. And especially so for young people. Danger is a rush and when people are in their twenties, they often as not seek it out deliberately. And if ~you~ have not experienced that rush, and the high that follows, with all that means, to bad for you!

Fascinating that when ever I have one of my rare visits here, this debate is still going on. To chime in with my two cents once more: Not having "romance" or sexual tension, is as bad as when it is poorly implemented. It's as immersion breaking, as "unbelievable" and as odd as poor writing and poor dialogue always is. Why do I think that? Because it's part of life, always and everywhere. And ~especially~ in a close knit group. In a small group, be it the army, a group of resistance fighters, a group of anything, placed in a high tension, stressed situation, sexual tension and "romance" will happen. It's a fact of life. I dislike blank slate characters for that very reason. They are just observing everyone else experiencing emotions and having a story. Themselves, they are nobodies from nowhere. What is usually wrong with "romance" in crpgs, is that they are about winning. Do this and do that, and your character wins the great price and live happily ever after. I've said it before and I'll repeat it, the best romantic story I've come across in any crpg, ever, is Morrigan and The Warden in Dragon Age: Origins. Because, there was no happy ending ever after, no matter what the player did. They could break up on good terms or bad terms, but she would ~always~ put her personal ambition above her feelings for the Warden. Furthermore, it was seamlessly integrated in the story and was part of the plot. Only the stupid gift system was off the mark, but that was how romance was done in that game. I don't remember that the romance in MotB was especially bad. It was very bad in NWN OC. BG 2 was fun with a male character and utterly dreadful with a female character. PS:T was great. Again, because it was against all odds and doomed to failure. If Chris Avellone is so set against romance, he needs to read more stories with romance in them. Not necessarily happy ending romances, but anything well written. Read these: Samuel Shellabarger "Captain from Castille". Totally corny romance, extremely well written and presented. Margaret Mitchell "Gone with the Wind". There'd be no story without the romance, and a protagonist as unromantic as they come. Alexandre Dumas: "The Three Musketeers". The protagonist is a naive fool, deadly with a blade, an easy tool for a scheming woman. Use romance as part of the story and not as some sort of silly mini game. It is as simple as that.

This game was funded by RPG grognards. Sorry, mate. You are barking up against the wrong tree.

I do listen to Colbert and Stewart. That doesn't change the fact that Maher is right about this. And about a great many other things as well. "Trickle down economy" has never worked! Not once. Not in any country, anywhere, ever! It is complete and utter nonsense. Tax cuts for the wealthy serves one purpose and one purpose alone. Make the wealthy wealthier! The don't create more jobs, when they get richer, they don't buy more. They just get richer. And the money accumulates on fewer and fewer hands. What makes the wealthy create more jobs and invest more money in production is one thing and one thing only: More demand for what ever it is they make money on. Taxes is about taking money from the rich and put them back in circulation. You want to get a capitalist economy working? Raise the taxes on the wealthy and lower it for the middle and the lowest incomes. They get more money, they spend more money. On stuff. Stuff that other people produce. It is so simple that anyone who's not a greedy, right wing politician or millionaire can see it.

I had a Lambda, which was Korean ZX81 clone. Then I got a ZX Spectrum and argued no end with all my Commodore 64 owning friends. And the I got a Armstrad CPC 6128. It had a screen! And a floppy disc drive And 128 kb of RAM. Yes, you read it right: 128 kilobytes of whooping RAM!

*Sigh* No, Obama isn't close to being a "commie". Read a bloody book, for crying out loud. And this made me laugh. Otherwise I'd cry. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqDBz4M9Jkg

.... Obviously you haven't got the faintest clue what socialism is. Obama isn't even ~close~ to being a socialist. He's not even a social democrat. Please, stop posting utter nonsense.