Diogo Ribeiro

Success is relative in Fallout; nodoby ever wins, and success wildly depends on what we're talking of. Did saving Vault 13 and the wasteland from Grey's plans was a successful way of completing the game? Sure, but successfully completing the game did not necessarily hinge on completing the objectives the Overseer had given to the Vault Dweller, especially considering that they were not the only ones present in the game. Siding with the Master was a perfectly legitimate decision; just because it did not meant succeeding in one task, or set of tasks, does not mean it did not succeed in others and therefore resulted in completing the game. Siding with the Master stemed from a decision by the character, not because the character lost all ability to fight of fend for himself as is the case with a standard Game Over. It's arguable if the character was the same after he was dipped, but the decision itself was made by the PC when the PC was still him or herself. It wasn't imposed on the character due to any kind of loss. Simply dying, and making a willing decision that results in character death is not the same. Still for the purpose of what was being discussed, several other endings that affected the gameworld could have been counted. Even if you remove siding with the Master from the list of endings, the truth remains that many permutations of what players did are simply discarded and only one, or a couple, of outcomes is used in the creation of a timeline for a sequel.

I put on my robe and wizard hat. Therefore, I roleplay a wizard.

It's not uncommon for the alternate endings that a prequel presents to be discarded for a sequel, and to have one of the multiple endings used as a basis for a sequel. Examples would be Fallout 1, where among multiple endings only one - saving the wasteland - is taken as a basis for Fallout 2; and Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain, where at the last sequence Kain can decide to sacrifice himself to restore the pillars or rule Nosgoth as a Vampire Lord -

I don't mean to condescend or to give off the impression that I'm trying to tell you what's best for your module development, but if you're going to be providing dialogue which reflects particular statistics like low intelligence or high wisdom, then you should take care that it actually presents different dialogues and dialogue outcomes. The problem I had with Neverwinter Nights' way of dealing with this that a low intelligence character could still solve things and be led trough the game's narrative, and an insightful character could spot motivations a mile away but still do nothing about this. Including 'dumbspeak' or 'smartspeak' just for the sake of it isn't really worth it if all it's going to be is window dressing.

Safana was more... Interesting

:| <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Chosen among a few not because of some great power he or she possessed, but simply because he got the short straw.

Eh, the Chosen One aspect in Fallout isn't very comparable. The PC is some average person who was unlucky and got chosen to go out there and save the Vault. He or she weren't even the first choice to begin with. I think any special thing about the PC comes directly from where the character stands during times of adversity and in the choices made, and not some sense that he or she is one grand hero with ultimate powers. Oh and yeah. Bloodlines is great.

He's got five internets open, and they're all under his control!

Why helo thar mr. developer man!

That's your prerogative, but that's not how it necessarily works. If your definition of real life, or something pertaining to real life, is based on personal and tangible contact, then by association eliminating many things that actually are a part of real life: communications, dreams, thoughts, feelings. One can argue that they do not have a physical presence or a physical manifestation (although they can be transcribed, recorded, etc.), but claiming they're not part of real life is pretty 'out there', to put it mildly.

So is a phone call. Does it mean it's not a part of real life?

It very much is real life. Just because the internet provides anonimity at large and most take it as a license to being jerkwads doesn't mean everyone should follow the trend and be the same.

EV: Nova basically has a few elements which make it shine in comparison. While I could provide a summary, I've had a tiring day and have got a spliting headache; so instead I suggest you read RPG Codex's review, as it pretty much nails it down. Barring that, the demo should be a good indication of what is possible. I got hooked on the demo alone last year, and plan on buying the game as soon as possible. EV: Nova also has a modding community, if you're interested. EDIT: By the way, you could also try Space Rangers 2. Here's a GameDaily preview that mentions all the coolness.

Closer to its final stages of development, Bioware actually focused more on exposing the singleplayer portion. This was particularly true in interviews. While anyone following the development cycle would have noticed that the amount of resources placed in delivering the multiplayer, toolset and Dungeon Master ability would likely take precedence over the singleplayer campaign, it's not really too dificult to surmise why many went into Neverwinter Nights's official campaign expecting a game in the same tradition of what Bioware had done before.

Gfted1's kidding. You actually have to equip the ring.

I know, but it would be a good idea to package them together.

It can be called an RPG. It can even have its hair tied in bunches, and be called Rita if you want. But those elements aren't exclusively RPG elements, and as such shouldn't be considered as defining of the genre, or taken into a different context then what's presented (in this case, those elements are applied in the context of a management game, not a roleplaying game).

There's several Icewind Dale compilations available at Amazon.co.uk, though I suspect there's also a handful of them on the .com shop, with Heart of Winter included. Too bad none actually has Trials of the Luremaster.

Now voiced by Patrick Stewart!

Welcome back, newc0253.

Ravenloft is D&D's token Horror setting.

If you've played Freelancer and are still willing to try another space-faring game, I suggest trying out Escape Velocity: Nova. Graphically it's quite inferior, but the gameplay generally blows Freelancer out of the water.

Metal Slug Advance. Still fun, but somewhat disappointing.

I don't really see the point for a Planescape remake. Even if it was remade with all the glitz of current technology, you'd still be recreating the game's feature which made it a cult favorite and also contributed to its lowkey commercial profile - the novel-sized text of it. Many gamers didn't like the "messy reading" back then, and with an increase of voice-acting in today's games it's almost guaranteed they'll like it less. Even those that do like to read usually prefer shorter bursts of text. Also, many instances in Torment were based on horror elements which were described in detail to the player, but never quite shown. I suspect pulling out corpse stitches, making incisions with a scalpel, and letting someone open the Nameless One's intestines (to name a few events) would be frowned upon by conservatives who may have a regulating hand in videogames. And wouldn't adding 3.5 rules make more sense if the game used them? Torment's use of 2nd Edition wasn't overly impressive or noticeable, and for the most part unecessary... Why would 3.5 really be necessary?

I'd go a step further and say that replaying games that are worth replaying is a very worthy hobby.