Cantousent

I'll open myself to vile recrimination by saying I think the scene where the vault dweller comes out into the daylight for the first time in Fallout 3 is one of the most powerful visual moments in the series. I'm pretty happy with the look and feel of the 'new' Fallout first person look, but I also miss the look and feel of Fallouts 1/2. That's especially true because I despise VATS in either Fallout 3 or New Vegas. Turn based combat in the first two was fun. VATS turned based mode is horrid and I hates it.

What I find ridiculous is that the BoS in New Vegas is hellbent on being terminally moribund, but it's ridiculous within the story. I don't think that's bad design because there are organizations that seem hellbent on their own destruction. Not only that, but many of those organizations have come back from the brink to surge in power or influence. Sure, more often they just end up difting to the bottom of the 'trash heap of history,' but the fact that it's not unreasonable for someone to change the downward path after the culmination of the game gives future design teams enough flexibility. As they've developed, the BoS deserves to die. I liked them, but if their attitude remains as it is, they are eventually going to be consumed or destroyed. Particularly egregious is McNamara's explicit admission that he realizes that his course spells the doom of the organization. Yes, they can survive a while longer by allying with other powers in the west, but they cannot survive in the long run without changing their ways. Political organisms that do not adpat to new situations die off.

haha Did you see MC's post in the middle of that selecion? I think she was making fun of those of us who talk about 'realistic' armor. lol

Yeah, I'm not sure why Freeside was split. I'm sure there must be some reason, but it made the area a pain simply because walking a short distance in the same suburb called for changing the zone, which was weird. I can see that with the Ol' Mormon Fort, but I don't understand the deal with the rest of freeside. It didn't make a huge deal to me, but I think it had some small impact on how I enjoyed the quests there. ...And I can see why it had more impact for others.

When I get the chance, I'm going to start a game of warband. I've been pretty much preoccupied by World of Goo. I've got all the flags in chpts 1 and 2, but last night I was playing in chapter 3 and it has Satan's own OCD map. Basically, you need every goo in a map where the burning matchsticks give you a time limit. It's a pain in the ass. Anyhow, time to give it a rest for a while and try something else.

I think the Odyssey is a great example for a variety of reasons. Here's some poor bastard basically dragged away from his hearth and home to fight for some numbnuts across the sea. His idea actually wins the war, but everyone's talking about this other 'hero' who is so childish he gets a whole slew of his comrades killed. When Odysseus comes up with the idea that wins the war, he gets screwed over and ends up taking as much time getting back to his home as he spent fighting the war in the first place. He finally gets home to find his wife besieged by suitors who want to take over the joint. I'd say that would be a great story. In fact, it is. I mean, I don't really care that Odysseus was a 'king.' Keep in mind that he still plowed his own field and in a straight line no less. Don't mistake Homeric kings for medieval monarchs. If anything, the fact that he started so high and ended up losing literally his whole crew only to end up fighting to regain control of his fatherland could add a little something to the story. Just as an aside, here's one take on Odysseus. http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/tennys...lyssestext.html Can't follow the line too literally, though. The story is too well known and folks would recognize it immediately.

Yeah, but the second time it's a fast travel frenzy. Return to Sender is well worth the effort in terms of the end.

I can see being irritated by the quest. For my part, it was actually useful though. For one thing, it gave me the lay of the land. On the first run, I went to all the spots. On the subsequent runs, that information I got exploring to find the places in the first run allowed me to plan out how I was going to stack my quests. The internal reasoning for the quest was actually quite sound. Sure, I had to buy into the idea that they would have someone they barely knew take the NCR codes to all those locations. On the other hand, all crpgs require the player to buy into the idea of being entrusted with things on short notice, especially sandbox. The fact that they would need someone to do it made a lot of sense. The culmination with Hanlon was excellent. It was marred by a bug for one of the endings, but it was a real payoff. Probably one of my favorite moments of the game was dealing with Hanlon. ...And, as opposed to the complaints that folks make about other quests, the whole line had some real heft to it. It didn't have the rushed feel to it that a lot of sandbox game quests do. The locations were spread all over the place and some of them were pretty damned remote, though. Gotta give you that.

I've always had a soft spot for Warhammer, both fantasy battle and 40k. Over the top, to be sure, but fun nonetheless.

It's the two pack and I'm playing the first one. I'll try warband after that.

I'll keep at it. It's not that I'm against the game. I thought it was an rpg for some reason, but I mostly bought it because the two pack was on sale for such a low price and I'd seen folks comment on it here in the past. I don't really have a problem in combat so far. From reading what you and pmp have said, though, it's really more of a medieval warfare sim than an rpg. If I can build a trading empire, that would be sweet.

My high skills character really did have sky high skills. I didn't even go all the way to level 30 and I had seven skills at 100. My lowest score was 13 (melee) and my highest non maxed score was barter at 34. I hadn't put points in barter, it just happened to get there because of my SPECIAL spread. The rest of my non maxed skills were over 25. So, if I'd gone until level 30, I would have had seven maxed skills and a minimum of 30 in the rest. ...But I also didn't take any combat perks in the least, either, so that's a trade-off. Wasn't quite as broken as Fallout 3, but I think both games were far more about exploration and the experience of the wasteland than tactics or strategic builds.

I've been thinking of buying Black Ops, but I haven't gotten around to it. I bought Mount and Blade and World of Goo from the same Steam sale. Mount and Blade seems like a bust so far, but World of Goo is awesome. I've been trying to get OCD for all the maps. I've managed to get the first chapter and a few on the second chapter. I got ocd on a map in the third chapter and a map on the fourth chapter kind of by accident the first time through but I think the rest will be killer.

Personally, I think the BoS would have managed to keep up their numbers if they'd concentrated on childbirth. They had access to *much* better medicine after the war and they also enjoyed significantly better stability. ...But we can pick apart the story forever and come up with reasons why this and that should be different. I wanted a better ending for the BoS, but I don't mind all that much that the devs went this particular direction. Frankly, like Tig says, I was more surprised by FO3 than NV when it comes to the BoS.

LC, you really could never complain that you hadn't gotten your money's worth out of New Veags: The Boone Experience. I'm going to start my fourth run soon. I haven't done anything with the consoles commands at all except for one thing. I couldn't find all the irradiated dogtags for this one quest. I scoured the area and then finally resorted to looking online. I found a command to take me to where I had killed the varmint and used it only to find out he wasn't anywhere there and I was stuck inside of a structure to boot. So, I looked around again and found a command to give me the tag. That's the only time I used the console commands that I can recall, although I did have to look up a few things when I got confused, but a few things out of so many steps in so many quests is not bad at all. I think the design team did a good job of making the quests fairly Cantproof. ...And if it's Cantproof, any idiot can do it.

In some of those tight spaces, it's hard to get two companions to follow you properly.

I played BG a couple of times with my own custom party. No banter at all. The thing is, games have NPCs. It's natural for the devs to take advantage of the NPCs in order to engage the player. That doesn't mean they have to sacrifice fighting in tunnels or killing monsters or tactical gameplay. It does mean that they have to invest design time and figure that most players ought to experience that design. I'm trying to wrap my mind around the rivalry system. I didn't immediately understand, but what I've gathered from reading some of the posts here is that there really isn't an 'evil' path, per se. For that reason, I can sort of get into the rivalry system. As I understand it, and I'd appreciate it if someone flat told me if I'm wrong in this, the PC interacts with the NPCs and they can either get along well because they are more or less simpatico in terms of their methods or they're friends because they have the same goal and enjoy arguing over their methods. I can understand that sort of friendship. Not everyone will get along even though they agree with each other as pertains to methods and goals. Of couse, folks who disagree about methods and goals can sometimes be friends, but they'll often be at odds. ...But if Bio has decided on this course of action and manage to do it well enough, I can buy into the idea. The party NPCs just happen to be folks who are in some way compatible with the PC, whether they're in completely agreement about how best to go about their business or not. Other npcs are arrayed all along the spectrum, from helpful to hostile. So I can get behind the design and enjoy the game assuming they do it well. As for the devs punishing the player for their actions, I see it more as rewarding the player with consequences for his decisions. I don't demand consequences in terms of NPCs. Fair enough, but there must be consequences for player decisions at some point that transcend attribute points and perks. I have consistently advocated making the truly evil or truly good paths more difficult for the player. That is a reward for me, not a punishment. I might be alone, but I don't think so. in fact, it's clear that at least some of the other folks here have at least a similar outlook such as Crazy T and Slowt.

With no fast travel, I seriously doubt that the Lucky 38 in the most significant place for most players. Of course, I can only speak for myself, and I wasn't much into it. By the way, I got a more or less good ending for the BoS last time, Harlie. I have to say, there's really no 'good' ending for them per se. Doesn't matter who's in charge. Doesn't matter whether you finish Veronica's quest. Basically, they can exist longer and dwindle or be extinguished as a force immediately.

What I don't like about the new system is that it doesn't matter what you do, your companions will follow you. Dudley Dooright of the Mounties? Your good companions follow you because you're like them. Snidely Whiplash? Your good companions follow you because you're so badass. Penelope Pitstop? Your good companions follow you because you look good tied up in rope. Completely ambivalent? Your good companions follow you because you manage to keep your balance by helping half the waifs and killing the other half. The idea of real consequences goes completely out the window. I don't mind story driven. No biggie if you take away my control of the sex of the main character or limit the classes or even force me to complete areas in a certain order. What I don't like is if any choice I make won't have any impact on my companions. Frankly, we need more consequences, not less. I mean, I think we should have companions leaving us earlier for being how we are. Maybe you could put in a way to ingratiate yourself back into the good graces of companions who've thrown you over. Fine. I don't even hate the rivalry idea as long as it doesn't cover everything. There should be certain points where particular companions will not follow for taking certain actions. It could be breaking some specific code or showing that you're an amoral murderer or simply hating your attitude. I understand that the team wants to make sure folks have access to a decent pool of possible companions and that they need to have all the roles filled for every character choice. Fair enough. On the other hand, it is a step in the right direction that I can't overcome contrary decisions by spamming gifts on people. In that regard, DA:O was worse than the rivalry system in that the player could piss off the npcs, who wouldn't leave me anyhow, and then get backin good graces by throwing a few bones out to the disgruntled companions. I would like to see more consequences in how my actions impact my relations with npcs, not less.

Took me a while to remember the term, but it's verisimilitude or something like that. Ringing true even though it is not, in fact, true. I like internal consistency, though. I mean, it's like characterization in games (or any sort of literature, I guess). What a character doesn't have to be make sense or even be sane, but there should be some reasonable expectation of consistency in motive. Maybe the motive itself is insane and thus irrational, but the whole package has to ring true. Thanks for giving me an excuse to go off on a tangent, Gorth. lol I'll spare you the essay that sprang to mind while reading your comments. :cant's wry grin icon:

Now, that armor, while it looks weird, doesn't appear to be over the top. I mean, throughout history, warriors have wanted to make themselves look fiercer to each other and the enemy. That's why you get all sorts of paint and feathers and hides and horsemane and the like decorating armor. Weird armor is fine as long as it looks like something the person wearing it can wear effectively while fighting someone. ...And I'm not going to go crazy over it. It's not like I want to take measurements and run it through some sort of program in order to make sure it would work. As long as it looks reasonably feasible, I'm good to go. On the other end, highly stylized armor and weapons are okay as long as it's clear that the look is more important than believability. For example... oh, I dunno... magic realism or maybe a comic super heroes game. On the other hand, that's one ugly looking elf.

Agreed, but the focus of the discussion was the distinction of customer and pirate. Sorry about your sister but she is irrelevant to this topic. It's kind of a pet peeve, but I've always hated it when someone says that someone else's point is irrelevant to the topic. You said that "the customer is always right." Kitty was providing a counter-example demonstrating that, quite literally, the customer is often not right. Among other things, I have had to give many many customer service seminars all the way from Redding in the north to Las Vegas in the east to San Diego in the south. While folks might feel clever saying that my statement is irrelevant, it does put me in a position to definitively say that the customer is not always right. ...And I'm quite the pro-customer person. ...Aaaaaand, I wouldn't have brought up my 'irrelevant' story if I weren't addressing an inaccuracy. I do agree that customers buy the product by definition. You "give an establishment your custom," which is pretty archaic these days outside of fantasy novels and computer games. On the other hand, consumers don't necessarily buy the product. They, by definition, consume the product. The manner in which the get it is.... irrelevant. :Cant's angry customer impersonation icon: Here's a totally irrelevant story: while I was stationed in Korea, I would haggle with the shopkeepers over prices and it's culturally kind of taboo for the shopkeepers to flat out say no. One time I offered 20k won less than the shopkeeper wanted for a leather jacket and he said, "Yes, but 20 thousand more." He conceded I was right the whole time, but he certainly wasn't going to sell to me for the price I wanted.

World of Goo is awesome.

I meant personal industry, not the industry as a set of businesses, although I think the fact that 'the industry' has been harmed by piracy is apparent in that it fights piracy fairly strenuously. The industry would not spend money to prevent piracy unless the management thought that there was some benefit. But you can take my comment as "I think it's wrong to take someone's time investment and effort without compensating him." As for stealing 1000 copies from 1000 retailers... I don't know what you mean. Are you saying that spreading out the harm between 1000 different outlets somehow lessens the effect on each individual outlet? I'm sure that's true, but that argument, in and of itself, acknowleges harm. I honestly cannot fathom how folks can defend piracy. Are you, Sorophx, living somewhere you cannot purchase things legally? Are the prices so horrible on every single game that you cannot, where you live, buy them either hardcopy or by download? I don't concede the point on the Southeast Asian argument, but at least I can understand it's an argument. Every single other defense of piracy I've seen here amounts to mental gymnastics. These arguments don't serve as a rational basis for taking software without paying the publisher. They're self serving statements concocted after the fact. Software piracy is simply wrong. I'd respect you more if you just said, "I want something but don't want to pay for it." Then I wouldn't bother arguing. What more would there be to say? You're a thief. This is all theoretical, of course, since no one here actually pirates... only argues why piracy isn't bad or is even beneficial. In terms of actual people, I cannot find it in me to hate all software pirates simply because I've known folks who are good and decent except for their attitude about stealing software. ...Or music. ...Or movies. Yeah, I don't want to go through life hating all these folks, but I simply don't buy any of their excuses.

I actually killed that big assed Roman masked man last time. Then I reloaded from a save and went through my speech check. In my mind, the best way to keep things balanced is to make sure that neither side is completely decimated. I don't want the NCR to bypass me to the south to knock off the Legion and take over their territory. The only reason the NCR is stretched thin is because they've got an actively hostile and unified force facing them. It might be hard to bypass Vegas, but they could and there's some prime and well ordered real estate that would be fairly defenseless if I completely took out the Legion. If the NCR pacified the Legion territories, they'd be able to overwhelm New Vegas in a generation. I need to be too tough to crack from all sides and I need to play the middle in as many viable sides as possible. I do believe that the NCR could be the most powerful faction of those I've seen so far, but that's assuming they can keep up communication and adhere to the institutions of their republican government. The strength of a representative democracy is innovation and enterprise born out of liberty. The weakness is the lack of a cogent goal born out of factious divisions due to personal freedom. In my vision of New Vegas, we'd crumble entirely as our own entity should we even attempt to form a republic with the Legion and the NCR on either side. The best I could do is allow for somewhat autonomous self rule in outlying areas while keeping hold as the supreme ruler in a more or less enlightened despotism. Such an arrangement can only be secured for a single generation, though, so I have to think of what will happen before the end of my days. Otherwise, we might have another good ruler, but then again, maybe not. That's why institutions are the most important thing I can build into the government. As for the dialogue, I think the witcher tries hard, but even then you get all sorts of hinky things going on in those trees, and I don't just mean sexually. I'm still interested in the sequel that I guess is coming our way. At least I think I saw a thread for it somewhere.