kanisatha

Well, Swen has since apparently tweeted that Google "got it wrong."

Yup, complete with enough power output to power a HEL.

I saw a report in a mainstream source a few days ago (I think it was a Reuters story) that Turkish and Syrian troops had exchanged fire with Russian troops caught in the middle. Not a surprise at all, something I fully expected and predicted would happen.

2M in sales for TOW at this point is very good. It puts it in the same sales category as D:OS2.

Here are mine: Solo-play RPGs are boring. Party-based games are a much more fun and meaningful experience. Single-player is the only way to play a videogame. Playing with other people is a painful chore. The first-person perspective in RPGs limits rather than enhances roleplaying. Turn-based combat is fake combat, and as such by definition can never be good in an RPG. Planescape: Torment is an overrated game. Corollary: Chris Avellone is an overrated writer. Playing Baldur's Gate 1 is a more fun experience than playing Baldur's Gate 2. All 4X games should come with the option to turn off the 'extermination X' part of the game. Playing with swords is way more fun than playing with lasers or guns.

And in Sisko you got to see a side of him outside his job. His relationship with his son was wonderfully portrayed ... that you could be very successful captain while also being a great dad.

The Gold Dragon path is it for me now. Have long loved the idea of playing a dragon character, and especially a gold. And though I get others' lack of enthusiasm for mounted combat, especially in an iso game, I think it is cool thing to have in the game (assuming they do a good with its implementation).

<gasp> And The Sisko is ok with this?!

Well you have to keep in mind that the Lance battlefield missile system we had during the Cold War, which was about the smallest of our tac nukes, had a 70kt warhead. So, progress. Bottom line, we dumped all our tac nukes after the end of the Cold War but the Russians retained many of theirs. In recent years they have fielded a new generation of tac nukes and in particular the highly capable Iskender-M system. Given budget realities, our only option for a response was modifying existing strategic nukes for tactical use as from-scratch new systems are just not going to get through Congress.

Mounted combat with dragon mounts for the Azata mythic path!! That's what I have my fingers crossed for. If they give me that, WotR will become my #1 cRPG of all time.

Maybe the problem is not the game or its sales numbers, but rather is the (unrealistic) sales expectations Obsidian had for the game. If Obsidian's sales expectations for the game had been about half a million, then surely they would not be seeing the actual sales numbers as having been anything bad. And, for a game like PoE2, perhaps the sales expectations should be in the half a million range given the kinds of games that appeal to large numbers of buyers these days. Speaking for myself, I would much rather have a game like PoE2 that sells only half a million than a game like D:OS2 that sells two million. So I am very happy that Obsidian gave me precisely PoE2 than give me a game very similar to D:OS2 which I would not have bought. The game preference niche that I belong to may be only half a million strong, but those people deserve to enjoy their preferred style of game just as much as anyone else. And it's very nice that up until now Obsidian has been willing to cater to that niche group (whereas Larian chose to walk away from that group in order to increase its sales). Sales numbers in some absolute sense should not matter. The only thing that should matter to a developer is whether they made money off the game or lost money. This is the lesson I believe Obsidian should take from PoE2. But sadly I am certain the lesson they will take is that there is no room for such a small niche game like PoE2 within Obsidian anymore, and that they too must abandon their small niche group of fans in pursuit of a much larger group of potential buyers for their future games. At the very least, Microsoft is sure to insist on it.

Yeah this I totally agree with. Time travel immediately turns me off a show as well.

Hehe. I guess I must be the only person who liked that theme song. I was very sad when ST:E got canceled. Still consider it to have been one of the better shows out there.

Actually you and I are in agreement. I also am very happy that Obsidian has tried to create a new combat system that is complex and intricate while at the same time being different from the D&D D20 system (and especially a system that doesn't rely as much on random chance). This is my personal preference, and apparently yours as well. But I believe my conclusion does apply when it comes to the vast majority of gamers out there, almost all of whom are never visitors to this forum. Your point that the only way to get people to appreciate a complex combat system is to keep at it with the games you make is very much valid, except for that developers need to show good profit margins today and not twenty years from now.

Yes! I saw this story too. The aliens are real y'all!!

Yes this is what I've pointed out as well. P:K has complex rules but because it's based on a longstanding TT game system it has a core group of fans for whom the rules are transparent. By contrast the complex rules of PoE don't have that same advantage, whereas this issue was moot for the D:OS games because even though they also were using a "new" rules system that system was very easy to figure out and not complex at all. So the lesson for me is if you're going to use a new rules system that players are not going to be familiar with, make it simple, intuitive, and easy to understand. If you want to use a complex system, use one that is already well-established (ex. the D20 system).

"Create"? Riggggggght. Bet they were hiking in the desert at Roswell when the idea just came to them.

Ohhhh, so that explains why you're not liking her too much. Yeah she's definitely not melee/frontline material. She is best for shooting from the back. There's even a specific build for her you can find in this forum that makes it possible for her to one-shot powerful enemies later in the game.

If you set her up right, including her equipment and tanking up her fox, she becomes quite deadly as an archer later on.

BBC America is doing a complete run of ST:DS9, something like 18 episodes each Monday and Tuesday beginning 6 am tomorrow. I've got my DVR set to record, though I'm concerned I won't have the time to watch them before I run out of recording space.

LOL. Me too. I just love P:K and am looking forward to backing this one with a good amount of cash. P:K is easily the funnest cRPG I've played since playing BG1 for the first time when it came out.

No you are blatantly wrong about this. Reviews are essentially anecdotal, and having a whole lot of them makes no difference whatsoever. The sample was not randomly selected, and as such provides zero validity. No respectable journal would publish a study based on online reviews. And yes, a biased sample *is* worse than no sample at all. Nope, you guys are the ones directing blatant and unfounded arrogance at me. You three are part of a very small clique of posters here who think the forum belongs to you, that you are superior to everyone else in the forum and get to play at being gatekeepers of the forum, and everyone else must bow down to your "knowledge" and "wisdom." And its not just this thread but every thread in the forum in which you post. You constantly denigrate and put down any poster who dares to disagree with you or refuses to go along with your line on things, and in the process drive away any and all other posters from the thread so that you can monopolize the thread with your inane posts. The best threads in this forum are those where you are not involved, where thoughtful, civil and inclusive discussions take place. The moment any of you decide to jump into a thread it goes downhill very quickly thereafter, which is exactly what happened to this thread from where it first began. So I'm done with trying to discuss anything with you. Feel free to continue on with your silly little echo chamber "discussion."

I did point out a flaw in your argument, a very fundamental flaw at that. Your entire argument, including your rationale for playing down my theory, is based on considering user reviews (as you put it). But user reviews completely miss two very major segments of the overall population: (1) those people who did not buy the game and never had any intention of buying the game, and (2) those people who bought the game, did not like it, but were not sufficiently motivated to write a review. I would estimate these two groups make up the overwhelming majority of the population. As such, user reviews are not only a non-representative sample of the population, they are a biased sample. So, for me, user reviews are not "known data." They are not data at all. Thus, when you use user reviews as your rationale for any argument that you make, for me that argument is completely unreasonable. I would not accept any inference drawn from user reviews (or even critics' reviews for that matter) as being reasonable/logical/factual.

There was a news article late last year interviewing the devs and they said the game had made enough money for it to have been sufficiently profitable for them (relative to their budget I would guess). I tried Googling the article but cannot seem to find it now.

This resonates with me. I think you have something here that makes sense (to me).