Sarex

Ok, I want to add one more thing. Yes you should grow a thick skin when talking on the internet, but imagine this. You work for a company that requires you to have constant contact with the people on the internet, ie. something like public relations, Then someone threatens you or worse yet your family. Now, as you work on the internet, you are not exactly incognito and it's not that far fetched that someone can figure out where you live and worse yet, years of exposure to the internet have introduced you to how bad/strange/mad people can be, it's not that strange that you could get unnerved. I mean you know that 99% it's some kid or a pathetic ****, but what if...

Guys, chill. What it boils down to is that kids and immature people go to the internet and actively search for people to vent on. The kids do this because they are not aware of the things they are saying (or at least the magnitude of the words they write), as for the others, well, they are just cowards who hide behind the invisible wall.

http://www.vgchartz.com/article/250066/mass-effect-a-sales-history/ for the sales numbers to the ME series. Well the total players for any game can't be gotten by it's sales history, because more people pirate it then buy it, but it's a good example of how popular the game is. There are also people who played the first part but didn't play the sequels, so those numbers grow even more. This is going off topic again.

You just made my point, if the same people didn't buy the 2 sequels, then that means that even more people played the characters. And good on you, for cherry pocking my statement in your quote.

Did she really quit in the end? Wow. The backlash on DA2 really got out of hand.

I see that you don't know what subjectivity and objectivity mean. While a subjective and objective opinion can both be true, that doesn't mean that a person can be both subjective and objective on a matter, that is an oxymoron.

Subjectivity and objectivity are mutually exclusive. So either we are being objective or we are being subjective. This thread is entirely subjective, as it reflects our personal tastes. You can't have it both ways.

Then sure, it's better.

Guess we agree to disagree on that. You are right we did wander off a little. It depends on the quality of the actors doing the VOs.

No problem. Ok I will concede to that, you are right that there is a trade off when doing full VO. But sometimes more writing is not necessarily better, as some books have shown. That is not what reactivity is. Reactivity is when, the characters simply reacts to anything you or you other characters do without any user input. Or to further elaborate, when they, for an example, comment/react to a certain situation. (I don't know how to explain this any better) Maybe so but in the game it self the characters have variety. They rarely share the same personality characteristics. As the characters/story are all the same throughout the whole series, I am considering them as a whole game.(But yes individually it outsold ME2 by 1 million units) As for Skyrim, it was never mentioned by me or anyone in this thread, it isn't even in the poll and most importantly I don't think it fits in to a category of the games mentioned here.

Nothing wrong if you like Bioware companions, but there is nothing "objective" in your list. (Not mine or other people, but you are the one that brought the objective angle) I just joined this thread... My first mention of the word objective was in the post you quoted. I mean read the page my comment is on...

Ok, if are going down the objective route (not accounting for personal taste), then DA and ME are hands down (like not even close) the games with the best characters. -Their characters are fully voiced -Their characters are the most reactive out of all the games mentioned here -Their characters had the most variety -Their characters had the largest amount of people play them (out of any game here) -Their characters are the most talk about on the internet (this is kind of tied to the previous example) If we where gonna go all objective in this thread, then the poll was completely unnecessary.

I didn't finish it because of the bugged final level (the hunt begins) and the save system is god awful. Other then those 2 crippling things, I would say it's meh.

Ie. remove some people from the project. As for investing their own money, I really doubt it, that is a rabbit hole that can have no end.

"Or, to put it simply, larger than what? Obviously the more time they take, in general, the more resources they'll need. But, with the exact same budget, you can take more time or less time. If you pay me $1,000 for a commissioned painting, I can take 3 days to paint it, or a week, even after spending the same amount on physical materials." This is what confused me. No matter how productive (or unproductive) they are, they still get paid monthly. The only way they could prolong the development/production time is if they cut the number of people on the project, ie. they had less people to pay each month.

As far as I know they get a monthly paycheck, so time/money relation is fixed. I could be wrong about the monthly paycheck though.

Tbh, I'm thankful for that.

Season 3 prize pool is 8 million, the winner or worlds gets 1 million. So it's not even in the same ball park. As for the champions you forgot to mention that every week there are free to play champions. Yeah RP(riot points) is a way to make money, so what? It doesn't make it pay-to-win. As for Dota being more complex, that can also be a bad thing. Bottom line is, in a team fight both games require the same skill set (amount of skill), it's only in the paths leading to the team fights where the games differ. You are being a fan boy, your game is not the best (neither is lol), it's just different. As for that "complex mechanic" called denial, yeah it's logical to kill your allies, and last hitting your own creep is complex. This is all I have to say on this matter, you won't get any more replies from me on this, as we are far off topic. Sorry to the mods, fell free to delete this discussion.

If that was a stab at me, I played it in the beta in 2009 when there were no 'ranked tiers'. I find it funny that you assumed that I tried to play it lost and then called the game ****. At the time Heroes of Newerth was a much more appealing game as it was pretty much not-DotA in a new engine, but it went downhill FAST when it became Free to play and they changed a lot of the core mechanics of the game to try and monetize it. I've played DotA since DotA Allstars 5.54b (back in 2004). League of Legends has succeeded at making a popamole/casual gamer style game out of the basics of DotA and incorporating it with the zynga-style pay2win (or pay to progress) to make it a money-making machine. DotA 2's model is much better with real money only being able to purchase cosmetic items and access to tournaments. LoL is an inferior competitive game compared to DotA 2, there is just no comparison. I am not a great DotA player but I am not terrible, I don't put enough time into it. My game is Call of Duty I guess, I've competed at national level in Australia since 2007 and I placed 1st or 2nd in every tournament my team competed in between 2010-2012 across Call of Duty 2, 4 and Black Ops on PC online and on LAN I started playing lol pre season 1 also. So I know that it was never pay to win, the whole system was there as a learning curve and pretty much everything you can buy is cosmetic. Runes which are the only thing that could make you win cannot be bought with money. As for lol being inferior to Dota 2 in the competitive scene, well there is not one example that would support that. The LOL e-sport scene is much bigger, the game is much more popular and both games require skill to play. While for me personally lol is better, dota is not by any means a bad game. You are classic example of a Dota fan boy.

Yeah, I see someone couldn't get out of bronze.

League of Legends?

Pausing in game is confirmed, as for pausing cut-scenes, are we even having cut-scenes.

Wait and see I guess, better to have low expectations and be surprised then have unrealistic expectations and be disappointed. I had too much much hope for BG:E, and it turned out to be worse then the original.

Ok so let's boil it down to the basics then. Looking at it for a logical stand point, are you saying that rape is worse then torture or death? Because all you discussion with me is boiling down to, you have experienced neither so you can't make that comparison. I know what both entail, so from that information I can make a comparison. We can simplify this even further, if you had to chose between the 2, which would you pick? The one causes permanent physical harm, the other causes temporary pain and discomfort (both cause psychological trauma). Tbh, I'm not really expecting you to answer that, but still ask your self and think on it. And as for there being no reason to compare the 2, well there is already a comparison in every country, it's called the law. You are just deflecting everything I say and dismissing it with the argument you have experienced neither so you have no right to talk about it, which I think is absurd. But then why do movies and books depict it so vividly.

Minority is a VERY broad term, and to say that they are weak because of their numbers is naive. I really have the the impression that you haven't read this thread or my previous posts. So I will summarize it for you, the discussion was, why is rape treated as something worse then death and torture, when obviously the two are much worse. As for the most common cases of rape, well they are the most reported cases of rape. It is considered that most cases of rape are unreported. Are seriously gonna claim that rape can in any way, shape or form be worse then torture. Ah, and now we come to this. To be honest I was expecting it. Well let me just make it clear, rape is a heinous crime and only weak people commit it, but to say that it's worse then torture or death is very foolish. Now, does that belittle what the victims of rape went through? I think not, I could only imagine how terrible an experience that would be, but sadly I also realize that there are things still worse then it. I now what illusion means, I said what I meant. Power is situational, it can be quantified to who holds the gun, and as such is an illusion. That right there is what started the discussion, why do people consider rape worse then murder and torture (as some obvious examples). And if death and torture can be shown in a game, why then can rape not be.