Amentep

Paladin, as a word, started - as I understand it - as a reference to the Twelve Peers of Charlemagne from The Song of Roland (albeit they were originally the companions of Roland, not Charlemagne in earliest chansons de geste). The word derives from the Latin Palatinus which was a reference to high ranking officials in a royal court. While these knights were exemplars of the code of chivalry and certainly tied into Christianity (as were the Knights of the Round Table, who are also sometimes characterized as Paladins and whose stories are tied to a pagan origin), the Paladin concept seen in D&D and its derivatives are probably more influenced by the Knights Templar, the Knights Hospitaller and/or similar knight and monastic orders as much as they are the peers of Charlemagne. All this to say, you don't have to have any of those things you mention to be a Paladin, because Paladin is a concept that exists as its defined in the game. If a TES game allows you to pick a set of skills and calls that a Paladin then that is what a Paladin is defined as for that game and/or TES universe. The Paladin as a title has no need to be connected to the D&D version anymore than the D&D version was held to the definitions of Paladins on display in Charlemagne tales or Arthurian legend (or else they'd be about searching for holy Christian relic, killing Saracen's in Spain and generally getting killed heroically in battle a lot which wouldn't make a lot of sense in Dungeons and Dragons, much less The Elder Scrolls).

Paladin is whatever it is / isn't defined as in the game. But lore itself is not role playing but a tool to aid roleplaying; the lore surrounding a theoretical paladin class is only going to be there to exist as a background and/or a constraint or guide to role-playing but is not, itself, role-playing. Factions also exist to create options and tensions in a game, but are not necessary for role-playing nor are they required to even be in a setting (although, again, they make the setting richer by adding options and tensions). Role-playing is what you do with the tools presented to you - it is not the tools themselves. Lore, classes, racial characteristics are tools to define a role, but role-playing is what you do with that role once you create it, in cooperation with your "game master" (or in the case of video games - as limited as they can be with respect to role play - what they game has been created to allow).

So long as they extend that same courtesy to everybody, whether it's an indie darling, a big time AAA title that may be advertising on their site, or a little known publisher title. Right, which is why I think companies who publish game reviews would do well to have an actual stated procedure. "It is GameRevewTypeWebSite's policy to..." etc. boilerplating articles with games with gamestopping bugs at launch.

Game mechanics /= role playing Lore /= role playing Factions /= role playing

Yeah I agree, without further information its kind of hard to determine whether there is a problem. I know, personally, I don't have a problem if a review site - for all publishers/games - follows a "1st review discussing bugs but leaving incomplete the evaluation of those game elements" then "revised or companion review after bug fix" procedure. In fact, unlike books or games which aren't often as altered in a quick turnaround (possibly years to revision), I'd almost argue that a video game site would do well to have a clear and standing policy on how to address bugs in games since they are regular and often quickly turned around.

So are we saying that the review posted on Eurogamer's website is backdated? Because the review I see (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-10-08-civilization-beyond-earth-rising-tide-is-generous-imaginative-and-currently-a-bit-broken) is dated the same as the date that STEAM says the game was released (08 Oct 2015). And in it the author only opts to not review the bugged element - although clearly saying it is bugged - in favor of reviewing a fixed version later. In fact it seems - although I'm unable to verify - that they did exactly what I'd expect them to do; release a review of the game informing about the bug and reviewing the elements that were, in fact, reasonably review-able and following up with further review at a later date (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-10-13-civ-rising-tides-alliance-bug-has-been-fixed-firaxis-says).

Video games - as we know them now - will never allow role-play in the sense that we understand it from P&P games. So to me, role-play in the context of video games has to be treated as a conceptually different thing from role-play in pen and paper.

So...she was an adventurer until she took an arrow to the knee?

and who says that in that galaxy a parsec is a unit of distance?besides the Kessel run may be a sort of test that measures acceleration or something. Everything is explained in Star Wars lore In the A New Hope novelization, Han says "standard time units" rather than "parsecs." Which show that Lucas forget to tell his explanation for the novel writer or they wanted novel to be independent product that don't need outside explanations. But who knows Lucas changed Star Wars lore every time he though something else sound more cool to him. IIRC Alan Dean Foster worked from a shooting script - hence why it novelizes scenes not in the film. To be followed by: You were lucky. We lived for three months in a paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six in the morning, clean the paper bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down t’ mill, fourteen hours a day, week-in week-out, for sixpence a week, and when we got home our Dad would thrash us to sleep with his belt. Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night, half an hour before I went to bed, eat a lump of cold poison, work twenty-nine hours a day down at the mill, and pay the mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad would kill us, and dance about on our graves singing "Hallelujah."

Yeah, weirdly even though they were supposed to be action RPGs they mostly reminded me of side scrolling platformers.

I confess, I don't understand the appeal of Demon/Dark Souls. Tried both, didn't like either.

Oh I understand why Nintendo is doing it, I don't know why the author who used the term "morally correct" about the decision seems to have no issue with the clothes provided its contained to the Japanese market. Its a weird article.

If the removal of the clothing choices were morally correct for the western audience, why isn't it morally correct for the Japanese audience? Don't get me wrong, its Nintendo's game to censor or not and I have no issue with self-censorship, but the logical disconnect there is confounding.

And into the 1940s in - at least - the case of Coal Mining.

More grotesque than funny.

What context makes it okay to want someone dead whose biggest crime is that people "revile" him on the internet? I mean common, its the internet. Pretty much anyone of note announces they're going to die there's some **** waiting to post anonymously about how glad they are they're dying. But in this case you seem to be saying you're perfectly okay with people wishing death and experiencing glee over same just because they annoyed some electrons in a way that annoyed you. Seems a bit...out of proportion, maybe? Yeah it may seem strange my indifference but it has a valid reason This is not about TB, this is about the level of debate between people like that and other ideologues on GG. You are trying to rationalize a normal response from me but how can I when nothing people like that say matters as its not based on normal thinking So I'm not going to pretend to show shock for something thats not real...its like they tainted and irrational...I'm not going to give them any recognition Saying "I'm glad he's dying" isn't indifference, which you claim capability of. What does the level of debate - or even whether they're ideologues or not - when a person says they're dying, unless you're arguing that you don't think he's dying and he's doing this as some sort of bid for sympathy which still warrants the question of why anyone saying "I'm glad he's dying" is considered good form?

What context makes it okay to want someone dead whose biggest crime is that people "revile" him on the internet? I mean common, its the internet. Pretty much anyone of note announces they're going to die there's some **** waiting to post anonymously about how glad they are they're dying. But in this case you seem to be saying you're perfectly okay with people wishing death and experiencing glee over same just because they annoyed some electrons in a way that annoyed you. Seems a bit...out of proportion, maybe?

Well aliens are one cool explanation. But it seems most scientists are taking a "well it can't be ruled out at this time".

And will Jason always be about 12 feet behind them no matter how fast they're running once they do fall down? I can see the Jason HUD now, a pop-up that says "Player 5 has fallen down and twisted their ankle - teleport to 12 feet behind them: Y/N"

The obvious solution is to change "Columbus Day" to "Columbo Day". People still get a day off and you got to admit, Peter Falk did kind of own that role. We in the USA can then capitalize on it (in more than one meaning of that word) by encouraging people to send "Oh and one more thing..." cards to one another on that day and selling candy cigars. It'd also make anyone who owned a Peugeot 403 into instant Parade material.

Looking at the blurry image, I'm pretty sure $3,500 says "Single Player Challenge Survival Mode". Hard to tell on the earlier ones (they seem more blurred, and I think some have clever names rather than saying exactly what they are).

I can't help but worrying as well - even if I was wanting to play multiplayer - that you'd only ever find MPers who wanted to play Jason, and rarely any who'd want to play the victims camp councilors.

It seems interesting, yeah, but multiplayer not for me. Maybe if they have single player as a stretch goal.

I see MK II and I'm thinking someone is talking about Mortal Kombat II. I see Mk II, I'm thinking Mark II.