213374U

Realizing that there are people that only understand (or at least, respect) force does not make you one of them. But thanks for the fallacy, anyway.

From what I hear, Malks are a Ventrue Bloodline in the new WoD.

If it's hot outside... don your sunglasses.

Volo didn't even bother to read the thread. So what's your excuse? No. Yes.

Coming from Volo, that actually means I'm right. Thanks, Volo.

TL;DR Chances are it's all incoherent gibberish, anyway.

Your example is still inconsistent. You are comparing Fallout's Science skill usage and application with DX's combat skill system. In the real world, no matter how hard you try, you can't properly operate a nuclear reactor without adequate scientific and technical background. Funnily enough, a difference of 1% in your science rating could mean the difference between success or failure, regardless of attempts taken. This is inconsistent with how scientific knowledge works and is applied as well, as with enough work (and a certain degree of scientific knowledge), one might end up solving a problem that seemed unsolvable at first sight, in what would probably constitute in-game a spontaneous increase of the science rating. However, you can keep taking shots at a target, and chances are you'll hit it eventually, provided you have a basic understanding of that weapon's operation. The same works for FO's ingame mechanics. Even with a low small guns rating, you would still hit the target if you tried enough times or got close enough. The two skills are as apples and oranges, but they are treated the same way by the ruleset, so I don't think Fallout is much better off in skill implementation than DX. In DX, JCD is supposed to be able to fire a handgun with some degree of proficiency, I don't think this needs explaining. Therefore the game isn't "telling you that you can't do something and then allowing you to do it", it's just merely indicating a low probability of success (your claims of uncanny accuracy with the sniper rifle notwithstanding). I also find it surprising that despite what you have said, you are less tolerant with that than with the player stepping in to solve a situation that the character lacks the means to overcome. Swapping between in and out-of-character freely like that (and the situations that require this by addressing the player directly, or by whatever circumstances) would appear to stomp on the barrier between player and character way more than DX's player-influenced combat skill system.

Lol

NO U!

TL;DR Chances are it's all incoherent gibberish, anyway. In previous posts you claim you have succesfully played through the game in a stealthy fashion. And now you say this? What's it gonna be then?

Catching enemies unaware is part of the stealth style you claim to have sported to beat DX... in this very post. Or did you tap them in the shoulder before shooting them? At any rate, shooting a man-sized target at point blank range requires no skill or reflexes whatsoever, unaware or not. Why should it limit player's choices beyond what is reasonable? JCD is supposed to be an active operative of an anti-terrorist organization. This assumes he's at least proficient with guns. Now, go ahead and produce the inevitable smarmy explanation for JCD not necessarily having those skills. I can't wait. Just about everyone? So far, you are the only one making that claim. Egocentric much? My word, and the system working as intended. A personal attack as an excuse for not presenting evidence to support your claims of leetness, how original. But it gets even better, as you accuse me of trolling, in the same paragraph! You're so full of it it's almost funny. Almost funny, as in sad. I'd like it better if you stopped assuming you're wittier and funnier than what you really are because judging from the lack of poor judgement and selective reading that permeates your posts, nothing justifies that smugness. What, playing hard to get? Now now, you know what they say... "beggars can't be choosers".

Well, I guess not just anything, but something as simple, easy and natural as violence, yes. The human being is a predator, you know. There can be no predator without dead prey. Can you? Well, that's news. Anyway, you can't get used to getting killed, nor can you improve at dying with practice. While many living beings are great at causing death, you'll be hard pressed to find one that excels at dying. Killing is the byproduct and ultimate end of violence. Maybe killing in and of itself isn't in our nature, but violence certainly is. Be it protection, feeding, or other reasons. When it comes to the instinct of lashing out physically, the intent is to kill or injure, so as to disable the target. "Killing is evil" is a human notion, and as such is a part of our rational, conscious self that is disconnected from (and sometimes overriden by) our base instincts.

Shooting an unaware walking target from one or two metres behind requires no skill or reflexes whatsoever. It does limit the player's choices because it makes a combat skill useless in a lot of combat situations (that don't involve sneaking). Well, then I can only congratulate you on your uber leet skills. You are the first person I see that claims they had no problems whatsoever bypassing the limitations imposed by the skill system. You should consider a career in Counterstrike. People earn loads of money that way. Again, there's nothing but your word to support this. I tried it, and it was completely inefficient. So, whatever. Maybe you'd like it better if I stuffed your mouth with something else? Hmm? It was often impossible because often you couldn't sneak up on one enemy without others seeing you. Thus the subtle difference between "often" and "always".

That's not reflexes. That's tactics and/or wits. It's not going around the system because the skill is still useless. Guns are supposed to be useful at a distance, but without points, they aren't really. Therefore, the skill is effectively gimped. And as Alan pointed out, anyone can walk up to you and shoot you in the back. It doesn't take a sharpshooter. On the other hand, I was never able to hit jack at long distances. You could shoot moving targets that way too? How much had you invested in the small guns skill? Again, the player is supposed to take advantage of the poor tactics of the enemy early in the game to supplement JC's lack of skills by that point. You are not supposed to be the unstoppable killing machine you are by the endgame, yet. Yes, they couldn't see you if you were behind them. So...?

You can't get used to being crushed by a flying pig, nor can you excel at it with practice. There is no instinct that may suddenly drive you to put yourself in the trajectory of said pig, either.

I don't see the problem with this, but perhaps I didn't understand what you were trying to say. Do you think it's unreasonable that you can hit a human head-sized target with a pistol at a distance of two metres? Anyone could do that, provided they knew how to mount the gun and fire. That also assumes you could sneak up on your target, which was often impossible. And just rushing them was not a very good idea either, especially if they packed shotguns or heavy weapons. All in all, I don't think DX had balance or skill usage issues (save for the lightsaber maybe).

You lose.

Hello? Eddo?

Lol. Can you see your ears? At any rate, you are entitled to your opinion.

You suck as usual.

They did it for the oil.

Super Street Fighter II Turbo. It's been years since I'd had my ass handed to me like this.

I was supposed to be a paratrooper combat engineer... but I quit. Too boring. Also, it's more of a light machine gun.