Amentep

I confess, this may be the first time I've seen "good graphics" and "Morrowind" used in the same sentence... At the time it was released it was considered to have very good graphics, and indeed for it's time it did. I found it unplayably ugly. it was about a year later when I finally played having installed a bunch of mods to beautify it. But maybe I was alone in that opinion at the time...

I confess, this may be the first time I've seen "good graphics" and "Morrowind" used in the same sentence...

The things you describe are called faeries or sidhe and they have very little in common with the Elves. Granted that Tolkien drew inspiration from them, but that doesn't make it his fault that people today took inspiration from him and made it in to something else again. The elves we know today are awful in large part to being inspired by the awful elves Tolkien depicted. You start with an awful base and your modified version is more likely than not to also be awful. Not sure if its a blasphemous opinion, or just trying to speed read too fast, but initially I read this conversation as using "Elvis" instead of "Elves".

Oh I agree with this one entirely. Because if combat was what defined an RPG then hack-slash games would be the epitome of RPGs. I don't think perspective (1st person, 3rd person, isometric) matters to either being an RPG or to the innate quality of the product I don't think TB, RtWP, RT matter either I don't think there is an inherent superiority to computer RPGs over Console RPGs or vice-versa I don't really care about the setting as long as its compelling; from a practical standpoint video games interpretation of modern, science fiction and fantasy boil down to the same ideas presented in different ways and in their specific context. While games have gotten more complex (graphics, storylines, options and input ability), I'm not really convinced they've gotten better since I was playing Ultima and Phantasie and Wizardry. Who cares if you put on a piece of plate mail and your character appearance doesn't change? Its an abstraction in a role playing game, not a computer based medieval armor wearing simulator. It is better to be a bad game that is entertaining than a good game that is boring

Well...its all well and good until the genealogy records show you're descended form Obed Marsh and then its just awkward.

Uematsu and Hisaishi are deaf like Beethoven (because that was the reason for the comparison with Samuragochi)?

You're comparing an open-world RPG where the possibilities are endless (a non-hostile NPC could be a villain for instance) to Bioware's linear railroaded RPG. Besides, I would argue that Dragon Age 2 is much worse in that regard, despite the restrictions on player freedom. You spend most of the game killing mobs of random people around every streetcorner, being a mage doesn't prevent you from romancing a character who wants to kill all mages, etc. Gay characters = good. Characters whose sexuality fluctuates to always be attracted to the player = horrible. Well arguably the character wouldn't be gay, but bisexual in that case. But every character being bisexual seems to stretch credulity in this modern day. Well so what to your so what which links to his so what which really means I'm saying so what to..... Thanks Amentep....now I'm completely confused You got me, I just wrote it. My point is that, yes, any relationship can be written poorly. Generally speaking I agree with the poster (in this thread or another) who said that usually if the character has a non-romance relationship that is poorly written most people just say "that character was poorly written". Now the developers have said they don't want to do a romance because they don't think - given the factors in the game of time, money, creators involved, whatever - they don't think they can do it justice, but are planning to do other types of character reactivity. Maybe those will be good, maybe they will be bad. The developers, though, think they can do that to their satisfaction and not romance. So the fact that romance could be done good or bad is, to my mind, a side issue to what the developers have said as their reasoning. Since personally I see romance as a specific subset of character interactions within the larger scheme of things, I'm always happy with character reactivity, dialogue, plots, etc when they're done well. I, personally, do not require that reactivity to include a romance.

I think you're missing the fact that the Kickstarter was pitched as a single player game, therefore its maximum audience is those who want a single player game like that being offered. While the audience that enjoys co-op play may overlap with the audience who wants a single player game like that being offered, by no means the person who primarily plays with their friends the audience for the game.

That, or collect a huge paycheck for a handful of lines (at least, I didn't read anything about him being motion captured). Plus, that's what he's best at, Vin Diesel's best part has always been The Iron Giant. Actually he is doing motion capture. He posted about training in the stilts so he could play the 7 foot Groot during downtime while filming F&F7. Also Rocket Raccon actually understand Groot's language (everyone else hears him as saying "I AM GROOT!"), so I'd think it possible that there will be at least one scene where Groot might be giving a lengthy dialogue piece as a gag.

Its supposed to be Nebula. She was a space pirate who claimed to be the grand-daughter of Thanos. She was made into a cyborg during a storyline and its this look that the GotG movie character is following. Since they may be changing the origin for Drax (who was Moondragon's dad in the comics) there is still the possibility, I suppose, that Nebula and Moondragon will be merged into a single character in the Marvel movie-verse.

I'm leaning incredibly awesome right now, but I liked the Abnett/Lanning book series this seems to draw a lot of elements from.

Have to say I played and enjoyed PST, IWD, IWD2, BG, BG2 without having any additional content added. Truth is other than content that improves the visuals of a game (like some of the overhaul mods I used in Morrowind) or fixpacks that fix things that never got fixed in official patches (like Platter's Fixpack for PST which - as above - wasn't essential in enjoying the game) I've never really been drawn to fan created content.

Guardians of the Galaxy Trailer:

"So what?" to your "so what?" As someone who argued for romances back when it was a possibility I see no reason to fight for it now that the developers have stated they do not think they could do it - given the limitations currently on the game - to their satisfaction. They're promising to give interesting, reactive companions. And that's all I've ever wanted (I see romance as a possible way to take a companion under the interesting/reactive criteria but certainly not the only way).

The obvious solution is a Kraken battle that leads to a Kraken-PC romance. PC: "How silly...we wasted so much of our time fighting over such trivial matters!" Kraken: "Gwaaarrrrrrphhhhh!"

I'd like to keep my multiplayer romances in real life.

Since the box is open and Schrodenger's cat either exists or doesn't (in this case, doesn't as we get no romances), we've moved from the theoretical realm of "romance" paths vs "friendship" paths vs "rivalry" paths to whether a game with no romances (PoE) would be impreoved by the inclusion of romances. Which simply isn't the case since it could be done poorly and the loss would actually makes for a better game (which is, after all, essentially the reasons the developers decided not to have romances in the game - that they didn't they could do it to their standards).

I have never perceived cliquiness or humorous criticism as particularly feminine. That's just human nature. (But maybe I'm tainted because I was born in 1979?) I suspect the distinction that Monte Carlo is looking for is that the male cliques of the past would pants theose they excluded as they came into school, tie them to a flagpole in their tighty-whiteys, then hop on a Harley and drive off into the sunset while flipping a bird at anyone who tried to stop them, possibly with a few kicks for good measure instead of making catty comments. But yeah, groups are an inherent part of human nature be it family or youth gang or anti-establishmentarians who prove their individuality by doing the same exact thing as everyone else in the group.

I loved JE. It is probably my favorite Bioware game (most people will stop reading here). That said I can objectively admit that it has its flaws - and a lot of them. Most characters end up the same, lots of railroading, Open Palm / Closed Fist not really being implemented correctly by their definition. And yet...I love the setting. I like the ideas behind it. I liked the characters. I liked the cut scenes. Would love to see a revisit to the setting, one that really makes a 4 axis Palm / Fist path (there really should be Good Palm, Evil Palm, Good Fist, Evil Fist), and that differentiates the characters a bit more so that you don't end up the same (instead of having 4 styles at any one time, I'd argue that players should be able to pick if their character is a Hand to Hand, weapon, magic or transformation specialist and make those paths viable instead of everyone is a jack of all trades)

While I liked BG, BG2, and PST...IWD was actually the game I replayed more. But then I love me some hackin' and some slashin'.

They just act like there is when Miley Cyrus twerks, as if we were in the 50s and Elvis had swung his pelvis.

D&D used to straight-up give fighters land, title, and vassals as they levelled. It was one of those things (see also, better magic item access and more restrictive magic) that helped fighters keep parity with casters that eventually got discarded. Nobody wants to work for some book-lovin' nerd. Thankfully D&D offered the charm, dominate and similar spells to get around that minor issue.

Nah, the case for Romance is that they make for more memorable and better interaction with party members. The case against Romance is.....mmmm.....oh yes we can focus on other types of party interaction and discussion arcs .... That is all Even as someone who is nominally pro-romance in role playing games, a poorly written romance isn't going to be "more memorable and better interaction" than well written alternatives. True but as far as I know no one is advocating a badly written Romance arc But there's no guarantee that by writing a romance arc that it will be good; therefore romance as element cannot be seen as naturally additive, ie game

Nah, the case for Romance is that they make for more memorable and better interaction with party members. The case against Romance is.....mmmm.....oh yes we can focus on other types of party interaction and discussion arcs .... That is all Even as someone who is nominally pro-romance in role playing games, a poorly written romance isn't going to be "more memorable and better interaction" than well written alternatives.

That would be 1996's Chain Reaction, IIRC. With Morgan Freeman, Rachel Weisz, Brian Cox, Fred Ward and Joanna Cassidy