You see, the first story was good.
The second one was in very poor taste. But it does illustrate the extent of the repercusions of trauma throughout a community in a conflict zone.
Just as fascist as "it's Fallout no matter how much we change it because we say so".
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Yep, couldn't agree more.
That is a GREAT idea. I like wandering a lot, but sometimes I like to just follow a quest (without landing/dismissing sixty-three others along the way).
So we see the XBox bias of the reviewer ... <_<
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
What is wrong with turned based combat? It worked wonderfully in the Fallout games.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
There is nothing wrong with it, per se; it's just that you cannot add "turn based" to an engine: everything has to be re-defined in the turn-based method. Non-trivial.
And the continuing fascist opinion that "if it's not turn-based, it's not Fallout".
For those that know, no explanation is necessary. For those that don't, no explanation is possible.
Really, some of the professionals do upwards of 4000 jumps. Do you think they are all vomiting as they jump out of the plane?
It's not for everyone. I can vouch, though, that it takes any other experience and pats it condescendingly on the head and puts it to bed early after some warm milk and cookies.
Gliding serenly in the quietude of the parachute is almost as wonderful and awe-inspiring as terminal veocity is a fabulous mouthful of adrenaline.
Don't LIE! You went out and bought three copies and played them all, hoping against hope that the game would get better and beat the expectations! And then you played through AGAIN, just to make sure!
Actually, it's
a long time ago
in a galaxy far, far away
^_^
(presumably also a parallel dimension where the laws of physics are suspended and the bollocks laws of Space Opera rule supreme).
Well, they do try to use science to create the illusion of SF in ST. A discontinuity is what Jimmy was talking about, where there is no value on a graph at a particular point.