Gromnir

according to fergie, npd accounts for approx. 1/2 total sales. dunno, all things being equal, we take the quarterly report over npd or vol... but fergie were pretty convincing when he suggested that npd were telling only half the story. as we said, we don't rely on vol. heck, vol and chris priestly were probable the only two folks we recollect as having suggested that jade empire were a big financial win. perhaps vol gets his data via priestly? were kinda funny watching as vol and sawyer argued jade empire success v. failure. HA! Good Fun! ps keep in mind that fergie's info didn't help him in his defense o' ps:t success. if ps:t npd numbers needed to be doubled, then so did virtual all other competing games. npd may not give an accurate measure o' total sales, but it is still a useful tool when trying to gauge relative success.

Why not? Probably because he refuses to read the link I've provided twice thrice. That's also a figure consistent with other available sources (NPD/ VGChartz; may be some recursion). we will always take quarterly report findings over fanfic. however, we will note that it is disturbing if npd and ea numbers is the same, 'cause point-o'-sale numbers is always less than total sales. uncle fergie once explained to us how such stuff worked when we presented him with npd numbers for ps:t. *shrug* am just saying... HA! Good Fun!

ah, I should've made it more clear: that was on my second playthrough (or third...). the first time I did it by the book and it didn't provide a challenge. anyway, in my wxperience BG2 had a lot to offer combat-wise. maybe it's a matter of approaching the game from a certain point of view. it didn't work in DA for me. can't say BG2 felt like hack n slash. DA did d&d is a more robust system than da; it had decades to develop previous to the bg's release. is understandable that d&d combat, and particularly d&d magic combat, would be more complex than da. 'course, complexity ain't always a good thing. for all the stuff bio fumbled regarding da magery, bio did forgo d&d-style resting and insta-kill spells. gets 'em a couple o' points. HA! Good Fun!

we frequently own canadians. HA! Good Fun!

so? homosexuals can become fireman and surgeons... we has seen 'em in tv shows. *shrug* HA! Good Fun! ps am certain you can come up with some good reasons why "marriage" has been narrowly defined by the courts... and please note that homosexuals is currently permitted to marry in all 50 states + American territories.

this is untrue. stoopid people are discriminated against every day when they attempts to get jobs or university admission. poor people is discriminated against when they attempt to buy cars or houses. athletically-challenged people is discriminated 'gainst at every school campus in America. ugly people is suffering discrimination and so is drug users. ... the Constitution does not view homosexuals as special; they don't get the benefits of heightened scrutiny. perhaps homosexuals deserve special protection, but please do not fool yourself into believing that homosexuals is the last remaining identifiable group that suffers discrimination, and keep in mind that discrimination ain't necessarily a bad thing. lord knows that Gromnir would rather not have a fat, stupid, and uncoordinated person trying to save us from a burning building or operating on our heart. HA! Good Fun!

I see no way that it wasn't 'ported'. you mean other then the fact that they developed different engines for the respective platforms? *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

Those are action/RPG not CRPGs. am thinking that aries using morrowind AND oblivion as separate examples is kinda funny. distinction between action and traditional crpg not seem important when there is some obvious and glaring differences 'tween those games mentioned and da. ease of combats coupled with non-existent party members and an absence o' large-scale area effect spells made a top-down pov complete unnecessary in morrowblivion. does anybody genuine want da2 combat stupefied to the level o' morroblivion? me, on the other hand, simply made combat ridiculous ez. *shrug* not matter action v. traditional. One other thing to bear in mind is that DAO sat around being converted to consoles for months after it was finished. is our understanding that the above statement is manifestly untrue. yeah, pc version o' da were complete first, but the console versions were developed parallel; there was no conversion or porting. HA! Good Fun!

90% is too high, but am thinking that 65% is too low to be taken serious. yeah, am understanding that some people genuine hate da:o, but the game were solid crpg fare. complain 'bout crpg plot? HA! might as well complain 'bout fantasy plot cross genres: books, film, games, etc. as soon as we sees somebody complaining 'bout crpg plot, we know that we can safely ignore their opinion regarding story development. one o' these days somebody is gonna have to explain to "game journalists" that plot is not the entirety o' story. regardless, is loads o' valid complaints regarding da:o, but the game is large with a solid cast o' characters, and engaging (if repetitive) gameplay... not to mention a well-developed game world and history. again, like it or not, the craftsmanship is deserving better than 65%... even if it ain't your cup o' tea. actually, one o' the greatest faults o' the game when considering replay is its size. we has been tempted to replay, but the size o' da, coupled with so many repetitive combat encounters, is making us recall the original BG and not in a good way. 65%? trying too hard to make a point. HA! Good Fun!

The other game took 7 years to be made (which translates in a gigatastical budget). This one is going to be published in march, next year. It will probably be just as successful. .... Draw your conclusions. well, to be fair, some considerable 'mount o' that +5 year development went towards building their engine(s). is not as if they gotta start from scratch with a new engine. in any event, da:o were a financial winner for ea based on all/any reported accounts. the gaming industry produces far more losers than winners, and ea has published their fair share o' losers. we suspect that the accelerated release for da2 is resulting from an unfortunate desire on the part o' ea to squeeze as many shekels out of the da franchise as quickly as possible. interplay did similar with iwd, and we ended up with iwd:how as the result. if ea demands a q1 2011 release for da2, then bioware has the unpleasant task of trying to figure out a way to develop da2 in an extreme short period o' time. cut til it hurts. does it make sense to mess with a winning formula given how few winners the gaming industry produces? no, but am suspecting that ea is quite willing to gamble on the success o' a streamlined da2. HA! Good Fun!

they should just kill the whole classes thing, make the character able to learn both combat skills and magic, restricting access to some branches depending on choices made by the player. like in Diablo or something (or like custom classes in Morrowind even), will save them even more time and me - the frustration as far as bio were concerned, a classless system weren't an option. they decided from the start to have classes. am personally not a fan o' classes, but there is some advantages from a developer pov to be using classes. also, given how poorly bio balanced skills, talents and classes in da:o, am dubious that removal o' classes altogether would help matters. HA! Good Fun!

"I do not mind some of the changes like the ones you mentioned + rogues being more ninja and less warrior in terms of combat. But i do not understand why they have to remove things like dialogue-text in favour for dialogue-wheel. " many of the so-called improvements and features of da2 is little more than resource saving devices. dialogue-wheels, human-only pc, and the unreliable narrator is nothing more than poorly camouflaged means by which the developers intend to reduce their workload. and if the 10-year arc is resulting in restrictive hubs as mc suggests, then you should add another Feature to the fraudulent resource-saver list. honestly we got nothing 'gainst bio trying to save time and resources, but their hyperbolic sales pitch by which they attempt to convince us that theses resource savers is Kewl New Features is insulting and unnecessary. and the easiest way to fix the rogue is to get rid of it. give warriors and wizards free access to thiefy skills and talents solves all problems. in early development the fans and developers got fixated on the notion o' having a minimum o' three base classes. the rationale for the Magical Triumvirate were as elusive to us then as it is now. perhaps biowarian attempts to match fan desires resulted in unnecessary class bloat? regardless, kill rogue = win. HA! Good Fun! btw, we understand why bio would seek to fool peoples into believing that their resource savers are kewl features, but Gromnir is more than a little disappointed by fans and game journalists who make it easy for the biowarians to peddle their snake oil.

IF the plaintiffs gets to SCOTUS, you is looking at a battle that appears forgone lost... from a legal precedent pov. do not break out the champagne yet. the district court judge didn't afford homosexuals suspect class status; he used the rational basis test to strike down prop 8. right now there is a considerable number o' second year law school students who is mighty confused 'cause they thought they understood the rational basis test. am not invested in this. so while we is opposed to judicial activism on principal, we do not feel enraged by injustice... or whatever. honestly, we hope the plaintiffs gets to SCOTUS and win, 'cause we can already imagine the Scalia dissenting opinion and that kinda entertainment is golden. HA! Good Fun!

actually, am not too concerned on the gameplay improvements. for instance, reducing the number o' spells and allowing for modified spells is sounding like a good thing... particularly as we recommended doing such many years ago when da were still in early development. there will, no doubt, be many gameplay improvements both noticeable and hidden. sometimes a significant gameplay improvement needs only be an alteration o' behind-the-scenes numbers crunching. if bio has a fault regarding gameplay improvements it is that they typically tries too hard to improve that which needs not be improved. bio's attempts to streamline ME2 character generation and development choices along with their desire to infuse more of a shooter "feel" to the game were improvements we coulda' done without. Gromnir enjoys cooking. one o' the most useful skills in cooking is the ability to do nothing. so often the desire to add salt, stir pot, and/or peek in oven will only serve to futz up foods that not otherwise need futzing. biowarians developers needs to better learn when Not to stir the pot. HA! Good Fun!

am not bothered by horned q. if the bio folks thinks q looks kewler with horns, then horns it is. one o' the complaints we heard regarding da were regarding the lack o' differentiation 'mongst character race models. dwarves, for example, were denigrated as distorted human models. if bio wants to make deathclaws furry, then we expect that we will get some explanation 'bout how deathclaws has always been furry and we simply did not realize/notice. doesn't seem like a major change, and it sure as heck ain't worthy o' being considered a major improvement. nevertheless, am not worried that bio added horns to some/all q anymore than we were disturbed by furry deathclaws. as for the removal o' the top-down pov, Gromnir continues to be amazed that such a suggested "improvement" is not getting more attention. even if the info is suspect, am disturbed by the lack o' response from pc fans. no top-down view for the da2 pc version = no da2 purchase by Gromnir; this is not a negotiable point. many new da2 features/improvements appears to be little more than resource saving devices, but we would probable endure such stuff as we enjoyed da:o. recognizing all the other "improvements," lack o' top-down pov would make us wonder why bio does not rename da2 more appropriate: Mass Effect: Thedas. HA! Good Fun!

Actually I agree with Volourn's point having read it. He didn't say that you were claiming people did not like BioWare's romances... he just said that saying that a group of people would like to see them improved isn't a very telling statement. Which I actually agree with. Even if I really like something, I won't claim that I wouldn't want that something to be improved upon in the next version. If I state I would like to see a feature improved, it doesn't actually say much about how I really feel about the feature. Whether or not I think the feature is good or bad, I'll still want it improved. But yeah, Volourn didn't actually say that you were claiming people don't like the romances. that is why it is so damned ridiculous to quote a single line and pretend likes it is an entire post. don't be like vol. we didn't act as if it were some kinda epiphany moment to observe that people wants the romances to improve, did we? again, we ain't complaining about the inclusion o' romances. they are popular and there is no way bio will remove at this point. nevertheless, ADDITIONAL attempts to alter or improve the romances w/o making fundamental changes is gonna be largely impotent. current bio romances cannot improve. is hardly a pointless observation if people is considering ways to fix or improve romances, now is it? bah. HA! Good Fun!

*sigh* your point? we didn't claim that people do not like the bio romances... quite the opposite as we noted that bio romances is popular. try to keep up with the rest of us, eh. the bio romances is not gonna genuine improve. other than the biowarians, we doubt anybody genuine believed that the Gift nonsense improved the da romances... and other than the folks who were frothing over the need for same-sex romance options, we has seen few who would honest say that da romances were "significant improved" compared to the romances from previous bio games. this is the end of the line. ps:t could be improved. motb could be improved. the nhl could SO be improved. sadly, bio romances is not gonna get signifficant better than their current incarnations, and window treatments such as da gifts is wasted effort. HA! Good Fun!

I believe Gromnir kind of hints at the idea that the only real way to improve upon the romances is to make them more integral to the story (and worthy of more resources). But I definitely don't think that this would make people such as yourself happy, as you tend to not like them in general. So it's a dead end, as it were. is good that you recognize the seeming catch-22. 'course keep in mind that we personally like the option to avoid bio romances 'cause we thinks such fare is poorly developed and not 'cause we is bothered by the notion o' crpg romances in general. am a big fan o' romance in the epics and westerns which so obvious influence bio storytelling. bio romances does little justice to our personal notions o' quality romance. HA! Good Fun!

bio romances is popular. bio romances is borked. given how popular bio romances is, there is no way we will see their removal. heck, we is likely to see bio put more effort into romances rather than less. sadly, bio has hit a development wall regarding romances that they cannot overcome. a tangential side-quest romance is necessarily gonna be rushed, immature and/or a bit silly at times. too much development needs necessarily be crammed into a half-dozen or so dialogue encounters that is kept tangential and insular from the critical path quest. "boy meets girl" becomes "boy beds girl" in six easy steps. there simply ain't enough opportunity to develop a meaningful romance story arc given the tangential and limited nature o' the biowarian implementation. even folks who likes the romances would like to see 'em improved, but the fact o' the matter is that the romances cannot be significant improved if the current model o' implementation is maintained. the bio romances has hit a dead end. the biowarians will try to slap on minor supplementary enhancements (e.g. gifts) but such stuff will not markedly improve the romances as a whole 'cause they does not address the real problem: paucity of development. the romances is popular, so they will not disappear from bio games... but attempts to improve is largely a waste o' resources. HA! Good Fun!

Was this still the case in Mass Effect 2? I've been giving it a try and so far haven't noticed any "different dialogue options leads to the same VO" but the first two dialogues were pretty trivial, and I've only really spoken to Jacob so far. It's a crazy time consuming process but I haven't noticed dialogue options at any point having the VO line associated with them in the early going. Less in ME2. I'm still thinking it's less a question of saving in VO,* but more actually having a lot of people believe that it's revolutionary in some way. *I'm sure it was a factor in ME1, though. "unreliable" is not same as "bad guy". winchester, from iwd, were only unreliable in retrospect with the final revelation o' the game... were akin to horror movie "gotcha" moment. such a revelation is not what one would typical identify as an unreliable narrator. is the reader/player ever presented with an opportunity to catch the iwd narrator in a fabrication o' some sort? does the iwd narration seem particularly self-serving for winchester? just 'cause you can see a motive for the narrator to lie does not result in a necessarily unreliable narrator. HA! Good Fun!

agreed, but romances is popular. nevertheless, it would be refreshing to see bio use their incredible resources to do... more. HA! Good Fun!

If he starts at 18 (and fit as a fiddle) and the game ends at the relatively tender age of 28 then I suppose the biggest potential obstacle is facial hair management and trying to avoid a nascent beer belly. if an 18 year old refugee were trying to convince Gromnir that he should be given troops to fight an Ancient Evil or that he had successfully scouted and destroyed a darkspawn enclave, we would be dubious. different cultures gots different notions regarding age of manhood. individual people is also having varied opinions. as for the physical impact o' 10 years o' combat... *shrug* assume for a moment that healing spells and potions don't make you 100%... they leave scars. would that change mc pov 'bout tender age o' 28 following 10 years o' combat? we played high school football and three years o' collegiate div 1 American Football... + 1 summer as an ironman arena league player, but that is a story for another day. regardless, we were playing a seasonal contact sport and we got scars both visible and hidden. we can only imagine what kinda trauma 10 years o' bloody combat would do to a body. HA! Good Fun!

there is a da universe analog... it all happened in the fade. it were all a dream, or was it? ack. *shrug* am curious to see how bio chooses to use various announced devices, but the past few games from the cannucks has taught us to limit our expectations. am not suggesting that game will be bad, but most o' these kewl improvements don't seem like improvements so much as resource saving moves to try and make a Q1 2011 release a reality. HA! Good Fun!

we would like to give bio some Benefit of the Doubt points, but it is getting ever more difficult to do so. the ten year span seeeeeeeeeems like a good thing. if, for instance, the Hawke character starts at age 18, the writers may be able to differentiate the rp experience by having the treatment o' the protagonist's perceived youth change depending 'pon the player's choice o' beginning locales. is not a major thing, but it can add to the game and storytelling experience... particularly if the developers add some genuine gameplay obstacles related to age... or elapsed time. unfortunately, am not confident that bio will take advantage o' such opportunities. am increasingly worried that they will simply do as mc suggests. unreliable narrator? is a meaningful technique when writing a novel, but am not seeing a point with a crpg... other than to do as mc suggest. unreliable narrator is useful when it serves to contrast or distinguish what actually happened... or may have happened. the reader of a novel, unaware o' the author's Reality, may gradual learn that the narrator is unreliable and the reader needs must reexamine some preconceptions they made during the course o' reading. but in the case of da2, the player will be experiencing reality, so the untrustworthy narrator can have less meaningful impact... unless this is da2: the psychedelic experience. *scratches head* dunno, but too many o' the da2 features is looking like little more than resource saving devices for the developer. as with the dialogue wheel from me, bio is once again attempting to convince consumers that less = more; they will sell you the notion that their shortcuts ain't cuts, but is instead a concerted effort to improve the role-play experience. bio is treating their fans like marks in an extreme large (but not too subtle) confidence game... and the game journalists is so clueless that they is actual aiding biowarian efforts to bamboozle. would be funny if we were not convinced that bio's/ea flim-flam efforts regarding da2 will eventual be successful... 'cause, "there's a sucker born every minute." HA! Good Fun!

In fact, it's not something official by Bioware, but just something a user reported, and apparently no one else heard, which lends credit to theory that he was indeed a troll . Here's the link. Now that I re-read the message, I'm 99% sure he's a troll , and I apologize for not spotting him before. Still, cut me some slack, navigating through those boards is painful I tell you, PAINFUL! *nerdrages* no need to apologize. at this point even the credible previews contain considerable speculation that will be proven inaccurate between now and release. we were simply curious why something seeming so significant were getting no mention in the Concerns and Boycott threads. HA! Good Fun!