213374U

Um, but there is a patch available for the game. And before that, there was an unofficial patch by some dude which actually seems to fix more things than the official patch in like... 1/10 of the size. Anyway, I don't care about bugs too much, unless they're of the game stopping kind, or affect performance seriously, like the Bloodlines memory leak. However for me it's not the bugs themselves. It's the lousy QA work that allowed those bugs to be in the final pruduct in the first place...

If you think Jedi Guardian is the most powerful class in K2, I think you are in for a little surprise.

If the delay meant getting a complete game, then by all means. If it didn't, well... I don't care much anymore.

Yeah dude, but who the hell is Black Isle Studio, again?

Spoken like a true core Fallout fan. :D

And what makes you think they'll want to keep the core fans interested? I mean, we have proven to be a pain in the ass and very hard to satisfy. If I was a game company CEO I would aim the game to the large 'casual gamer' masses first, then to the 'core' gamers. All that is in the realm of speculation, anyway. What I do know though, is that they're not going to sacrifice sales in order to keep the game 'true' to what the 'core' fans think Fallout is (or should be). And I can't help but agree with that...

That's your opinion. Opinions, however, aren't enough to make an objective truth. You say that FOT failed to be a good SPECIAL-based real-time game, yet I disagree. Um, I hope you're right, but honestly, I think that's wishful thinking. If it was Troika or Obsidian developing it, perhaps the chances of the game featuring a TB mode would be greater. But with Bethesda behind the game, I wouldn't count on it. After all, they have the license now and can do whatever they want with it.

Ouch.

A rather short-sighted opinion, if I may say so. Today the world is no longer a bunch of independent territories, Hades. It works as a whole. What other people do in their own countries is their business alright, but it can become your business as well thanks to globalization. Autarchy is outdated, even for retrogrades. You just can't have a flamewar and not be part of it, now can you?

So what are your plans for when the nukes start to fly? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'll either survive, or I won't. No problem. :cool:

There goes the neighborhood. :ph34r:

Blah... blah... blah... blah... I'll make it simple for you. If you have 100 dollars in your pocket, and you give 60 of it to the poor people down the street, not only are you carrying them along but you're making yourself poor too. Until you've taken care of all the problems at home, and have created an "abbundence of wealth" it's not very smart... and even dangerous... to just throw your resources away. Heh. Do you really think macroeconomics work as simply as 'the money you have in your pocket'? If you need to make such simplified examples, perhaps it's you who doesn't get it. The foreign policy is necessary to support the current economic model of the US. If you remove the military element from the equation, the foreign policy as it is now, no longer works. Right now, there are two things that prevent wars from being started in a lot of places. One is the fear of a nuclear retaliation (think India-Pakistan), and the other is fear of a US/NATO intervention. If the second element no longer exists, a lot of the commercial interests and resources that the US has access to right now, would no longer be available, causing the economy to collapse. Think Saddam's little adventure on Kuwait, only on a larger scale. The choice is, controlled, selected wars or all-out war? I suggest you take another look at your US History before swearing.

Agreed. If they can pull an Afghanistan again, the attrition would be negligible. However, making profound changes in the next target country is a different story. I don't think it can be done without a well established US/NATO presence. And um, that's the whole point of a war against tyranny, ain't it?

Huh? Where did I state the opposite? However you have still to prove the advantages of a non-existant foreign policy. No. Crime and overpopulation aren't going to bring the US down. As for a deficient school system, it isn't a national-scale problem either, because a lot of qualified specialists from foreign countries immigrate to the US every year to fill in any gaps left by the schooling system. So, as much as you may dislike it, the system works. Perhaps not for everyone, but in general it does. Well, that might as well be unavoidable. I don't see how pulling out US troops out from everywhere would prevent that, though. No. Nowadays not even the US can consider itself self-sufficient. An aggressive military stance is an important part of the US foreign policy. It's been that way almost since the US formation. It sure looks like it's worked well so far. I don't see a reason to change.

How did the attention need to be diverted from Afghanistan? It wasn't the G.I. Joes dying there. The ground war was being waged between local factions, mostly. And the September 11 memory was still fresh, so there wasn't really that much opposition to the war. At the present rate of attrition being suffered by the US forces stationed on Iraq, I don't think another invasion is feasible, not even for the almighty US Army. People may not revolt against another war, but do you really think people is going to stand for drafting for a war 'against tyranny'?

Because both Yoda and Palpatine are 'officially' level 20 by the D20 ruleset. Adding 'epic' levels would not only not be consistent with the setting, but it would also mean that there could be individuals significantly more powerful than those two. So far, that doesn't seem to be the case.

If I Remember Correctly.

I don't deny that. However, if that had returned huge amounts of cash, more games would have been made that way. Ok. There are like 7000 users here, let's consider all of them hardcore. Do you think it pays to develop a game exclusively for 7000 people?

Not gonna happen. 'Hardcore' gamers are a minority, and it's not cost-effective to develop a game version for them. That added to the fact that, if left with no choice, most hardcore gamers will get the 'dumbed down' versions, wouldn't make that the smartest business decision ever. And um, I don't think the average Joe would feel so proud buying and beating the dumbed down version... "

No. The FR/D&D settings are fundamentally different from SW. The barrier between deity and mortality is faint at best in D&D, and there are a lot of creatures there that are between both worlds. There is nothing like that in SW, everyone is mortal and can be killed with a well aimed, lucky blaster shot. The SW D20 ruleset is designed to reflect that, hence there is no reason for 'epic' levels. The emperor and Yoda are both at the pinnacle of the power scale of the SW setting, and both are near physical collapse. Beginning to see a pattern there? That only points to a flaw in the design of K1/K2, that is, overly simplified combat. Applying a lame patch (ridiculously easy combat) to a game feature that was probably put there on purpose in the first place, is a double fault, or the result of a serious lack of vision on the devs' part. Another perfect example of bad balancing and leveling curve. If the player hadn't been level 999 by that time, there wouldn't have been a need to make monsters immune to Timestop (FFS!). No, I'm not really bothered about how many levels you get, either. What bothers me is that those 50 levels you can get are worth exactly the same as K1's levels. As somebody pointed out earlier, it's absurd to have characters with 500 HP. Anyone said munchkin? And no, it doesn't make sense that the Exile should be more powerful than Revan, but then again, from the ruleset standpoint, it doesn't make sense to go beyond level 20.

You just made my day. Well, not really, but it's cool though.

That's actually a good idea. However that would break the first rule of modern gaming: Thou shalt not piss the casual gamer. Apart from needing an 'exotic weapon proficiency: DBLS' feat, it works just like in KotOR. That is, no difference between wielding two sabers, and wielding a double bladed one. It's easier and cheaper to build two sabers though, IIRC. I don't like much how that is handled in the D20.

I agree, the squad control interface was rather clumsy. That's what happens when you try to adapt a single char, TB combat GUI for real-time squad combat. But that has nothing to do with SPECIAL not being compatible with real-time. I must have missed the stone in which that was written. That's exactly the same (and only, actually) reason for bashing FOT I've heard so far. Not good enough for me. And um, if that's how you think, perhaps you'll be disappointed by FO3. I don't think they're going to make it TB.

Beautiful, though irrelevant. The US isn't trying to save the world. The US is simply trying to preserve its hegemony, that's what empires do, you know. And when great empires crumble, dark ages follow, always. I'd rather not have one of those anytime soon. And pulling the troops out would fix that how? False. US troops can provide an element of stability which is needed in many places. Be it to help in natural disasters, prevent civil wars or help kickstart somewhat democratic political systems, US troops on foreign soil are an integral part of the foreign policy.