Gromnir

1) there is no moral high-ground for pirates. bunch o' clowns. trying to rationalize your actions is ridiculous to watch... without it being funny in the least. not nearly as humorous as a dozen o' you spilling out of a car or shooting each other in the face with seltzer. go back to your traditional exploits as you is clearly getting tripped up by your big shoes. nevertheless, we does see some cultural loci for piracy advocates, so perhaps you were perverted by a twisted upbringing. it seems that the closer you gets to se asia (and russia) the more likely one is to see piracy being defended. for those o' you raised improperly, we may feel some sympathy for you and your bankrupt morality. 2) the only reason information piracy & copyright infringement is not equivalent to theft is 'cause o' the traditional common law definition o' thefts no carrying away o' an object with the intent to permanently deprive... so no, theft is not accurate. nevertheless, the reason for criminalizing piracy and common law thefts is the same: you is taking, without permission, something that don't belong to you.... and any o' you whack jobs who argue the semantics o' piracy now gets the Big Hypocrite label if you ever complain o' what you see as Gromnir-acting-likes-a-lawyer. HA! Good Fun!

crock. am gonna call bs. some o' the same folks complaining 'bout da art is the same folks who applaud or ignore age o' decadence art. is bs. is loads o' reasons to blast bio games, but art is kinda a weak option for vilifying... and it is more than a little hypocritical coming as it does from certain parties. keeps in mind that Gromnir is more than a little disappointed with the wacky dominatrix half-armour look for the da2 main character and for flemmeth, but da2 looks not noticeably worse than did da or many other crpgs we care to mention. take out tactical overhead view and streamline combat is enough to annoy Gromnir to the point where we will wait for a bargain-bin release, but the present focus 'pon art is mostly bs from hypocrites. HA! Good Fun!

eh? why not? sure, you can find loads o' examples o' giant weapons and ridiculous armour in western games and animation, but anime is so freaking replete with over-the-top visual stoopidity as to makes sarevok's bg armour look almost realistic. ... am personally convinced that watching the vast majority o' anime kills more brain cells than does drinking a fifth o' gin. is numerous examples from this thread, and others on this board that would tend to support our belief. HA! Good Fun!

not helping. is all mages secretly dying to be Diana Ross? am trying to figure out the mystical fashion sense, but robes, and boo's mardi gras reject is not our idea o' manly. HA! Good Fun!

robes and staves. some guy wearing a dress and leaning on a stick does not scream Manly. *$#@ tolkien... the notion that mages should be crotchety old men who wear robes beyond their bathroom door, AND while adventuring, is an unfortunate legacy o' the hack with the horrible prose style. don't blame the poof factor on game developers... blame on tolkien, and those who loves tolkien. Gromnir wants to play a mage that can find a freaking pair of pants.... altering geography would be nice, but gots 0 to do with power. HA! Good Fun!

It also contains THE defining Indy moment. The movie's superior to Last Crusade in every way. No supernatural bullcrap, just good old-fashioned arse-kicking. ... did you watch the first Indian Jones movie all the way to the end? am thinking you missed a few scenes. HA! Good Fun!

just as warriors cannot alter most 2d and 3d game environments, mages is limited to expressing violence 'pon the bodies o' creatures. am not seeing how anybody who has played a d&d crpg created in the last decade can feel an absence o' power. would it be sooper-groovey-keen to have fully malleable environments in games? perhaps.. am not sure o' the cost v. benefit on that, but regardless, mages is rarely relegated to being ambulatory pyrotechnic displays with questionable manhood. HA! Good Fun!

1) Gromnir understands the reference to castile, but what we didn't get were the specific notions o' art. reading in context is always helpful. 2) complain 'bout a name that sounds, possibly, vaguely like Castile is pretty much the definition o' nitpicking. congrats. 3) people (more than a few) complained 'bout the title o' Dragon Age as if such naming were exhibiting creative turpitude. tig comment is reminiscent o' such good times. 4) yeah, Gromnir is bio's white freaking knight... ride in to save their reputation anytime they gets criticized. *snort* tig gets more mileage with your castile observation. HA! Good Fun!

I just want to know if Castille is now obscure enough to be a good fantasy name by changing the suffix. Now I'm also wondering if Castillon is going to be Castille-like, or it was just random name-grafting. It strikes me as amateurish, like calling your desert lands "Arabicana", but maybe it's not so bad for less history-oriented people. typically we see people is picking at nits in an attempt to find reasons to dislike bio. is more than enough genuine reasons to dislike bio, but it always seems as if some folks is working extra hard to find problems with bio that they maybe not see with some other game developers. 'course moments o' self-doubt arise and we begins to consider that maybe, just perhaps, bio really is the Root o' All Evil... then tig or some other regular posts and our universe is set right again. some o' you folks is nuts. HA! Good Fun!

nope. we did get a generic space marine vibe. HA! Good Fun! ps am not criticizing. bio Never goes fringe or avant-garde with story & setting, so am expecting something... familiar. is not bad to go with familiar stuff... so long as it is done well. pps changed "rarely" to "Never".

every fallout game has had silly humor... loads o' silly humor. that includes fallout 1. the setting itself is humorous as it takes every 1950s B sci-fi movie and pulp story cliche and blends 'em together with all the delicacy o' some drunk sorority girl vomiting forth her half-eaten pizza and beer. ... the biggest fallout mystery for Gromnir regarding the fandom has been observing how deadly serious some folks can be regarding their favorite gaming franchise, when it seems clear to us that fallout gots more in common with Burton's Mars Attacks than Lang's Metropolis. "On the plus side, there are tons of faction quests. You get the feeling that every side is working towards an internally reasonable goal, although I actually think one of the major factions, the Legion, is on the odd side in terms of its own internal logic." you not need factions to create loads o' side quests, but am agreeing that we is looking forward to do more o' the faction quests... although so far they has been kinda underwhelming. nevertheless, the potential is apparent, just not actual execution. as for the legion...the legion bugs us, and not just a little. is not so much post-apoc as it is history nerd indulgent. seems out-of-place on multiple levels. HA! Good Fun!

repost from codex... kinda sums up our thoughts in a manner more brief than is common for us. fo:nv plays pretty much exact the same as fo3... save that it is skewed even more in favor o' shooter gameplay. vats is so underpowered compared to the iron sights option that whatever vestige o' tb gameplay that might have existed in this franchise has been thoroughly relegated to the post-apocalyptic waste pile. am supposing that some folks see that as a positive. the new vegas wasteland is a a well-constructed (if stale) setting that IS more reminiscent o' fo1 than fo3. am supposing that some folks see that the return to a more generic wasteland setting is a positive. fo:nv added hardcore mode... which don't make the game anymore difficult, but it does add a level o' gameplay micromanagement that were not present in fo3. 'course insta-travel means that you is never more than a tedious load screen away from a doctor, bed, water source or potential dog/geko/bighorner corpse. am supposing some folks see hardcore mode as a positive. the factions is laughably broken, but we s'pose they does prevent some psychotic wannabees from indiscriminately decimating entire towns and cities. but am guessing that some folks see factions as a positive. there is dozens o' skill boosting magazines, and a perk that doubles their efficacy... which largely nullifies obsidian efforts to minimize the skill point bloat o' fo3. am s'possing that some folks see the new fo:nv skill progression scheme as a positive. etc. we liked fo3 well enough. we like fo:nv well enough. is no surprise that we like both games, 'cause other than the blessed reduction o' the number o' radscorpion attacks we had to endure while wandering the wastes, fo:nv played very much like fo3. HA! Good Fun! end repost. am getting that folks like fo:nv, 'cause Gromnir likes new vegas well enough. however, am completely baffled by those folks who see new vegas as some kinda major improvement over fo3. HA! Good Fun!

Not to intrude on what seems to be a private conversation, but I'll probably respond to this affirmation where I see it. New Vegas takes something I enjoyed (Fallout 3) and increases that enjoyment. You have given no compelling reason to prefer the DC wasteland other than your personal tastes. I don't know if that's arbitrary or not. Frankly, most things in life are arbitrary. Regardless, no matter how often you affirm it, there is no objective reason to prefer the DC wasteland. I respect that you prefer it. I just don't accept that it's because of some golden standard. The best you could affirm is that the majority of players agree with your assertion, which is probably hard to prove. You enjoy the DC wasteland. Fine. But your tastes are not inherently better in any quantifiable way. That's why I don't argue that the New Vegas wasteland is better. I argue that I like it more. no objective reasons why dc is better? perhaps not... but is pretty tough to maintain an argument that recreating largely unknown hills and mines and burgs is gonna create as compelling and an intriguing a setting as would the replication o' dc landmarks. is a matter o' taste? sure, but is still a tough sell. in fallout 3 they combines well known with lesser known... got iconic landmarks AND insider knowledge AND additional gameplay made possible by developer/player knowledge o' setting. in fallout:nv you gets loads o' geography, but little else... 1/3 the job o' fo3. sure, fo:nv is maybe kewl for locales, but w/o the insider knowledge it could be anywhere USA. heck, the most recognizable vegas landmarks is absent from the game. the tops, gomorrah and other actual vegas locations coulda' been set anywhere in the fo universe. the old mormon fort... is that it? am understanding cant's love o' fo:nv setting, but that is 'cause his opinion is colored by familiarity. otherwise, nv is disappointingly generic and stale. is fo:nv a return to the old wasteland settings o' fo1 and 2? perhaps... perhaps that is why the purists enjoy it, but that also contributes to its seeming generic staleness... 'cause you got a decades old setting being recycled. fo3 went original. fo:nv went reactionary. 'course again, lost in the setting debate is our observation that the game itself does not play much different than fo3. am guessing that maybe factions change gameplay for those people who slaughtered their way through previous fallout games, killing every targetable creature in sight, but it didn't change anything for Gromnir... save to make us wonder how we were instantly recognizable to legionaries and powder gangers at distances that defy imagination... did somebody tag us while we were sleeping, got a radio device pinned in our ear likes some capture-and-released endangered species? and the reset for reputation once entering vegas and beginning the house quests were cheeeeeeze. got a well-deserved audible groan when we were told that all past crimes were forgiven. *snort* HA! Good Fun!

still not listening. is not simply a comparison o' landmarks... and surely not fidelity o' landmarks. am not caring if landmarks is replicated exact, particularly if the reality o' a rl landmark is boring. new vegas replicates caves? ssssoooo? the developers job is to Make the locales interesting. why on earth would Gromnir be impressed with a mine, quarry or cave simply 'cause it exist in rl? if developer rl knowledge can make more interesting, then so much the better (as were done with fo3) but the vegas wasteland maybe manages to be accurate, w/o being unique or compelling. fo:nv is a generic wasteland, which should be unforgivable. and as for nipton being more clever than any portion o' fo3, we hope you jest. there genuine ain't much to do in nipton considering that it is a critical path town. a powderganger with broken legs and a kinda silly villain delivering his message o' DOOM? 1007 some buildings and move on to some place more interesting... heck, the rows o' crucified powder gangers didn't even inspire a moment o' emotion from Gromnir... were all just kinda background noise. poorly crafted. and the aside about the lottery does not resurrect from a banal little burg into some kinda example o' obsidian development cleverness. the transit system o' fo3's dc were far more clever and offered more gameplay than nipton. arbitrary preference? not by a long shot. what does surprises us is how devoted some fo fans is to new vegas considering how little it actually improves 'pon the previous game. HA! Good Fun!

"You're faulting Sawyer and Obsidian for your own lack of effort and / or lack of taste for the setting." eh? what is with you and strawman? we has been to vegas (real and in game) but has not spent much time there as yet. nevertheless, we has spent considerable hours (+30) combing the area around vegas. is generic. so, no & yes: we has clear put in considerable effort, but no, we don't find anything particular compelling 'bout the setting. is not the developer/writer's job to make the setting compelling or interesting? gets another pass from pop? wacky stuff. HA! Good Fun!

regardless, is helpful that people post actual images representing what they sees as kewl and original... as 'posed to bland and generic. tastes in art is so individualized that w/o the benefit o' visual aids we has no notion what boo or tig may be referencing. HA! Good Fun!

weapons is MUCH more accurate in fo:nv. targets that we cannot even initiate vats with is relative easy insta-kills with a night-scoped headshot from a varmint rifle.... and that is with negligible gun skill. the only time we ever use vats is in the unlikely event some critter gets immediate on-top o' us... has become cheese. is no way that Gromnir could hope to aim five shots accurate to the head o' an enemy directly adjacent to us in rt, but vats makes possible. using ranged weapons, we played +90% o' fo3 in vats. using ranged weapons, we played +90% o' fo:nv in rt. the last vestiges o' fo tb is dead. HA! Good Fun!

"Wait a second, how does FO3 capture the personality of DC? " an obvious response: we never said that fo3 captured the personality o' dc. "at the same time, the developers utilized their intimate familiarity with the locale to give DC a personality that new vegas does not have." *shrug* nevertheless, we will answer your query as if it were actually a response to a Gromnir statement. the fo3 setting actually had a personality... the setting made a difference and added to the game. maybe you didn't like the train tunnels, but they were a kewl touch that helped bring dc to life and added a gameplay aspect. 'course pop maybe ignores fact that fo3 embraced locales in dc other than The Mall. we got dupont circle, georgetown, and key bridge to name a few recreated areas, many o' which were familiar to even a casual tourist. whether Gromnir were familiar with dc or not, dc from fo3 felt likes a post apocalyptic city in ruins. it felt, if not genuine, realized. we could tell by playing the game that were were only catching a few o' the references to locale flavor that were being added to the game. we get no such feeling from fo:nv. the vegas desert o' fo3 is a bleak place with very little personality to be calling its own... and perhaps that is a genuine recreation, but if so then the obsidian shoulda' chosen an alternative location. "Ain't a lot of obvious, phallic monuments to tickle your geography prostate." am s'posing that you were going for irony as fo:nv, while failing to makes us wax nostalgic for vegas in any way, shape, or form, has a number of iconic phallic buildings dotting its generic wasteland landscape. "Was a return to turn-based combat ever part of Obsidian's approach to FO:NV? I don't believe it ever was, but maybe there's a quote out there that proves me wrong (I'm sure you've got a whole mess of Sawyer quotes just lying around). Given that, I fail to see much irony. Breaking: Company fails to fulfill imaginary goals, more on this at 11." wow. the apologists really come outa the woodwork at times like these, no? Gromnir knew from the start o' fo:nv that this game would play more like a shooter... based on sawyer criticism o' vats on the boards. pop again applies poor reading skills to create a strawman? we never suggested a broken promise. nevertheless, for all the fo purists who were hopeful that obsidian, a company with long standing ties to the original fo games, would resurrect the ephemeral True FO we has heard so much 'bout on these boards, it should come as a bit of a shock that it were obsidian that delivered the dagger blow to fo turn-based gameplay. HA! Good Fun!

am not having the familiarity o' vegas as does cant, so we is left with ordinary tourists' knowledge... same goes for dc. as between fo3 dc and fo:nv's vegas, we will take dc. maybe cant loves his nevada wasteland, but am thinking that if the obsidians had told us that the game were set in texas, or northern california, or even a post-apocalyptic kentucky, we woulda' found not much more or less convincing. is hard to accept, but Obsidian's fo:nv setting were surprising generic. as for he factions, perhaps we is jaded, but color us unimpressed... so far. do a handful o' fed-ex quests for the boomers and you gets idolized. kill some powder gangers and you is vilified. go to vegas and suddenly your reputation slate is set to neutral no matter how many legionaries you has slaughtered along the way. really? 'course it does appear as if there is a very complex set o' options for dealing with the various factions in new vegas, and we look forward to exploring those options. nevertheless, as somebody who explored much o' the wasteland without entering vegas itself, we ain't been particularly impressed with the options made available to us... and some resolutions and options seems kinda counter-intuitive. the npcs is typically falloutesque... which means that they is quirky w/o much depth... and that is ok. the fo universe has managed to become quite popular w/o having particularly compelling characters, and fo:nv will not alter that trend. maybe the game gets far more interesting once you explore all the vegas stuff, but the ghoul cultists and strung-out supermutants just ain't changing our perspective regarding fo character development. is a fun game... is just not significant better than fo3. honestly, we thinks that the changes obsidian made to kotor were more impressive and meaningful, but the ending o' that game were so bad that the positives were somewhat obscured by avellone's craptacular kotor2 conclusion. does fo3 have the traditional obsidian denouement disappointment? hope not. HA! good Fun!

I'm not sure how original it is (dark elves always seem to be sexy BDSM woman) but I agree the game could use more of it. am gonna go silly/stoopid and channel vol for a sec... no. *shrug* too much o' da maturity were lame. a few half-arsed horror elements and some angsty sex. huzzah? let the leather-clad harlots dance unbridled in the bioware basement, 'cause such stuff don't add nothing to a game or story unless it is implemented with a kind o' deftness that currently seems beyond bio's reach. also, such content requires equal maturity from an audience that clearly ain't the target o' biowarian games. the Average Gamer would not "get." wasted effort. HA! Good Fun!

the game looks and plays and Feels like fallout 3... with some minor cosmetic changes. the cosmetic changes is appreciated, but hardly represent a sea change for the franchise. is strange that the game is both more varied and yet less distinct than its predecessor. fallout 3 did sometimes feel as if one were playing an oblivion game wherein buildings and "dungeons" were disturbingly familiar. nevertheless, the dc setting were cleverly replicated, taking full advantage o' the dizzying number o' well-known landmarks in the area. at the same time, the developers utilized their intimate familiarity with the locale to give DC a personality that new vegas does not have. new vegas has kewl vaults with aggressive flora and air force bases manned by the post-apocalyptic progeny o' the evil midnight bomber what bombs at midnight... but it just don't breathe like fallout 3 did. having roamed the wasteland Before going to new vegas, we has uncovered much o' the game content, but am hopeful that there is larger and more complex quests as part o' the Mr. House portion o' the game. ... am simply not "getting" fo3 the way some folks is... and the tech issues is particular disturbing in an xbox game. is fun... but not noticeably more fun than fo3 were. this ain't a vastly better rp experience than fo3. minor cosmetic changes and a more stale setting results in a very small net gain. HA! Good Fun! ps vats were rendered largely irrelevant for ranged weapons by making the iron sights option so darn powerful... the irony being that Obsidian's tinkering with vats further removes fo:nv from its turn-based ancestry.

every generation o' consoles has basically been computers... no new insight. what sets consoles apart is that they got a single hardware configuration and the qa folks not have to account for the vagaries created by the individual pc owners software and driver problems. now it is true that today's consoles ain't as uniform as they once was, but the fact that an xbox is a computer is hardly a noteworthy observation. HA! Good Fun!

It is okay for PC games to be buggy because developing a game for PC is developing for dozens of different systems. Developing for a console is developing for a single system. That's why console games have always been less buggy than PC games. Consoles are basically computers, but part of the draw of a console is that you don't have to deal with all the crap PC gaming gives you. You don't have to worry about your hardware, operating system, drivers, or that the e-mail with the cute pictures you looked at has a virus. Ease of use has always been one of the strengths of the console, and transforming them in mini-PCs or 'home entertainment centers' annoys me. as a pc gamer, we much prefer playing games like fo:nv on the pc. however, to avoid the beta-quality o' the typical pc release we has stopped buying pc games on day 1 of release. the main reason we bought fo:nv for the xbox 360 were to avoid being an unpaid beta-tester for bethesda and obsidian. so imagine our surprise when we discovered that the initial release of fo:nv has been plagued by glitches, freezes and bugs. ... it seems that some lessons gotta be learned the hard way... no more day 1 purchases o' xbox 360 for Gromnir. *sigh* HA! Good Fun!

dunno 'bout that... and at one point didn't he suggest that perception would impact ranged accuracy? am not seeing any change based on decreased/increased perception. some folks is trying real hard to ignore problems with new vegas. am not certain why. HA! Good Fun!

we muscled through some of the xbox 360 game freeze issues in goodsprings and ventured out into the wasteland. from a technical issues pov, the game is running smoother... at least til we got near Nipton. ... some o' you folks is off your nut. while fo:nv appears to improve some/many fo3 issues, the game doesn't play much different than fo3... and truth-to-tell, the setting o' fo3 were far more intriguing and better developed than what we has seen so far from fo:nv. However, we is not too far into new vegas, so is possible that obsidian's game will gain kewl points as we progress deeper into their most recent release. were fo3 a faithful adherent o' fallout canon and the avellone's fo bible? perhaps not, but am thinking that one o' the things bethesda did right in fo3 were that they did embrace the essence o' fo w/o bothering to follow the chapter and verse canon. so far, the game plays very much like fo3... but w/o the originality o' the dc setting. SOME quest appears to be having more varied possible resolutions, which is a good thing, but we also got quite a bit o' simple filler as well. in any event, those folks pretending as if fo:nv is some kinda Salvation-of-Fallout is... nuts. HA! Good Fun! ps most disappointing is that the dialogues has not been noticeably improved from fo3. am fully aware that dialogue were not a strength o' fallout 1 or 2, and perhaps the developers did their best to hearken back to the stale writing o' the original games, but this were one aspect we were genuine expecting to see significant improvement.