Amentep

Errr...not CHECK I think. Sucker Punch's plot is - AFAIK - about a girl injustly imprisoned in an insane asylum who concocts an escape plan with fellow "inmates" which is presented as a series of fantasy adventures for the girls as the line between their realities and their fantasies blur subjectively for them.

That's just being boring. There's bed..there's the bath, the shower, the kitchen counter, the dining room.. Sometimes you just have to enjoy exploring the house in fresh ways.. What I've understood so far is that you chaps have hidden hot women in my house, and I have to go find them. Let us know when you find them all.

I agree. The combat plays like DA:O to me too, except where you could press a button and let it go (not recommended) in DA:O, in DA2 pressing a button and letting it go will cause your PC to attack once and stand around like an idiot (really not recommended). The choices for Warrior/Rogue/Mage in combat terms feels different and - if I have any complaint about JE it is this - in JE no matter what attack styles you took, your character always played roughly the same in the end (because of the paper/rock/scissors system - every player ended up with a martial style, a weapon style and a magic style hotlinked to switch between because you had to be prepared for enemy immunities and they all the types in a particular style roughly did the same thing, ultimately)

I gather she likes the branching storyline and choice and consequence of RPGs and - short of "Choose Your Own Adventures" that kind of thing is few and far between in the printed page. I gather that what she thinks would appeal to the currently-not-a-gamer woman would be a hybrid RPG/Point and Click adventure. Something with the ability to customize a character, but where armed conflict wasn't the problem resolution tool of choice.

Can I just say that, while I was away someone decided that using "awesome" in facetious way repeatedly was the height of snarky wit, and I for one find it annoying? Thanks for letting me get that off my chest. As to the Vault Dweller's review - one thing that I kinda agree and disagree with is the use of magic and everyone failing to notice. It *is* odd, and they kinda hamstrung themselves a bit with it because of how they did the setting but its also not terribly odder than no one batting an eyelash at you walking into their home or place of business and rifling through all of their locked chests if a rogue character (and this is more egregious a fault in other games where you can loot not just chests, but drawers, lockers and other things as if the inhabitants of the world decide to dispose of unwanted goods by dumping them into their cupboard until the next wandering adventure comes along and relieves them of it and saves them the trip to the local store through monster infested swamps to get the one copper the junk is worth). Probably just me, but I chalk it up to being part of the game mechanics and not the story portion of the game. Otherwise there are some fair points (although the constant shout outs to things not about the game are frustrating, IMO).

Thought I'd launch this by re-posting my last post - Y'see, this is where I get all controversial... it's like saying men would dig chick flicks more if you made all the garbage about dating, kissing and dancing optional and threw in a few more zombies / car chases / explosions. That is to say, stop it being a chick flick. Cue lots of angry chick flick fans who want to see Bridget Jones Diary, not Bridget Jones Zombie Apocalypse (which naturally would be cooler). You can't appeal to everybody. You just freaking well can't. Bio want a game for story fans for action fans for women for men for CRPG addicts for casual console gamers for.... everybody. They are seeking some sort of mythical alchemy of game development, the ambrosia that is the unigame that appeals to everybody. And this race to the lowest common denominator is what is killing their games and, by a process of mimicry and osmosis, the genre. *shrug* I may be plebian, but I still enjoy Bioware's games. But then again I'd probably enjoy a Role Playing Game where there was no combat (instead all the attribute/skills were in other types of skills and experience would be from - say navigating a tricky political situation) if done right. And I also have to point out that I did disagree with her, ultimately. I think the problem she's trying to address is actually built from a false premise; specifically that every woman who isn't playing games is an untapped game player as well as that every game player - male or female - plays games for the same reasons. In terms of Dragon Age 2 in general - I've been enjoying it. Even considering the reuse of maps, they did a good job of trying to use the reused maps in ways that didn't make it seem like you were running through the exact same dungeon (using doors to close off/change paths, starting at different points of the map). Personally - and I'm sure I'll pilloried for this - my impression thus far of Dragon Age 2 is stronger than Dragon Age: Origins (which I confess was rather middling in my opinion until I played with all the additional content/expansions which then made it feel like the game I'd originally expected).

I get up, go about my day and stuff happens. I don't pretend to understand any of it. I go to sleep and in my dreams, stuff happens. I don't pretend to understand any of that either. Life is what you make of it. Do you want a half full glass or half empty glass? It is up to you. Also, I like fuzzy kittens. Awwww...

Y'see, this is where I get all controversial... it's like saying men would dig chick flicks more if you made all the garbage about dating, kissing and dancing optional and threw in a few more zombies / car chases / explosions. That is to say, stop it being a chick flick. Cue lots of angry chick flick fans who want to see Bridget Jones Diary, not Bridget Jones Zombie Apocalypse (which naturally would be cooler). You can't appeal to everybody. You just freaking well can't. Bio want a game for story fans for action fans for women for men for CRPG addicts for casual console gamers for.... everybody. They are seeking some sort of mythical alchemy of game development, the ambrosia that is the unigame that appeals to everybody. And this race to the lowest common denominator is what is killing their games and, by a process of mimicry and osmosis, the genre. *shrug* I may be plebian, but I still enjoy Bioware's games. But then again I'd probably enjoy a Role Playing Game where there was no combat (instead all the attribute/skills were in other types of skills and experience would be from - say navigating a tricky political situation) if done right. And I also have to point out that I did disagree with her, ultimately. I think the problem she's trying to address is actually built from a false premise; specifically that every woman who isn't playing games is an untapped game player as well as that every game player - male or female - plays games for the same reasons.

To be fair, her response was in regards to getting more women into gaming; while I disagree with her, her point as I see it was that for women who'd like to play an interactive story like a RPG, the combat mechanics will keep them from connecting with the game/medium. Ahem Perhaps I should have said "don't have a legion of game developers busting their door down with new Point and Click games to satisfy the demand of gamers who'd buy/play point and click games"? It would. Or at least reduce the combat to very specific gameplay bits. The combat was nto well-integrated into the game regardless. But PS:T is a bit of a rare gem, no? Anyway, there's plenty of room for combat free games. If BWare wants to go that way, it would probably suit them well. They seem mighty infatuated with the singular brilliance of their writing. I think PS:T is a great game. But then I enjoyed the combat in PS:T; hell I played BG and IWD at that point so I knew what I was getting into. Then again I enjoyed the combat in DA2 as well. I'm a simple man of simple pleasures.

I remember people suggesting that PST would be a better game if someone took out its combat. Point and click games used to have an audience.

There's a

Thanks! It'll probably won't turn out that way though - I have a terrible track record with these sort of things...

Red Lantern District Inn = The Blooming Rose Also Viscounts Keep and I think the Alley map (used for the gas plot, for example). Did you count the Disused Path underground in the Docks? (I'm thinking its unique, but my memory...hazy - maybe its the Merchant there throwing me off). Also the Approach to the Wounded Coast (the ambush site for Aveline's re-intro after the first year and the escaped Mages quest) I don't think is used for anything other than the Approach to the Wounded Coast. There's the Generic Outside Map (used for the Ironbark quest, the last map in the Ketojan quest, etc) I'm assuming the Dock House is the generic interior used for the two foundries and a lot of the thieves quest?

My sneaking suspicion is that some Protheans did something to humanity (per the trinket the Asari Consort gives you's revelation when used on that Prothean object that the Protheans visited/did something to early man) as a last ditch effort to create something that could eventually stand against the Reapers (since the death of the Prothean's took some time (per Vigil on Ilos) and there's indications the Mars outpost was remote relative to Prothean society, IIRC) and that its this that the Reapers/Collectors were ultimately trying to figure out.

Freudian slip?

I've been trying to avoid spoilers for the game (so I can explore it all at my own pace) but when I first played DA2 and saw that they were reusing maps I thought there'd be a number of people who didn't like it. Personally, it hasn't effected my enjoyment of the game at all.

Unless that's all part of the dwarf origin, I guess I missed all of that somehow. I wasn't even able to get into the Senate chamber until the very end as I recall. The female dwarf off the opening dias is there for all origins (in fact it was a Human Noble PC that I first talked to her) but I think she is only there at the very beginning. The Senate Chamber - if you go in it once you'll see Harrowmount/Bhelen supporters arguing and the head of the chamber kicks everyone out (including you). If you do this Bhelen and Harromount's seconds will be easy to find (Harrowmounts will be standing outside the building instead of in Harrowmount's estate). Its possible that if you start some of the quests these things are no longer available. No, the Shaperate literally says the documents you are showing him are not the actual documents. Bhelen's man gave you fakes. And when you go back to him, he says he doesn't care. It's a test of loyalty. My point was that Bhelen's second is telling you these are the documents filed in the Shaperate, but they're not; the idea is that Harrowmount filed them, not what he actually filed with the Shaperate. I was trying to address why the two nobles supposedly hoodwinked by Harrowmount would be fooled by the ruse - its because Bhelen supposedly the documents you have are what was really filed with the shaperate, not the deal that was arranged (but of course its all a ruse).

And if you talked to the Shaper, he reveals that the documents are forged. Is the Shaper the guy in the library? I never asked him about that. Yes, how is it possible they wouldn't recognize the forgery since I showed them both the same documents? I believe the idea is that Bhelen's man is presenting the documents filed with the Shaperate, which is supposed to show that while Harrowmount promised the two families two different pieces of land that what he filed in the shaperate gave them both the same piece of land; remember that the Shaperate is supposedly closely related to Harrowmount giving Bhelen an angle to play (the Shaperate even says he's related - but also that he's related to most of the noble families) and the idea is that he's not playing fair with his duty - allowing Harrowmount to snooker other nobles. Also there is a female Dwarf off of the opening dias who will also explain Harrowmount/Bhelen's divide; the argument in the Senate chambers also clues in on some of the basics. For me I felt there was enough information to make an informed decision on.

Depending on the bugs involved, I could easily see them dropping a few points for them.

I enjoyed the Deep Roads, but then I liked the combat in Dragon Age. My only complaint was that it was sometimes hard to manage the loot.

I tend to give certain people/teams/company some benefit of the doubt on sequels or new games. But if bad games kind of use up that goodwill then its hard for me to go back to buying games from that group even if its a sequel to a game I liked.

I really, really enjoyed Tomb Raider - jumping around, solving puzzles and shooting stuff. I bought Tomb Raider II and didn't like it. I went ahead and got Tomb Raider III hoping it'd be more like the first one. Didn't like it either and haven't had anything else to do with the series. That's about as close as I've come to buying the sequel of a game I didn't like, I think. I never beat God of War - I had the same revelation that entrerix had, only about half-way through the game. Can't see a point in getting any of the sequels as it seems to be more of the same (although perhaps more ridiculous). That said if a sequel appeals to me enough, I'll get it even if I didn't play the first game.

Comic strips and comic books are older than radio and television and arguably dramas in both of the latter two formats have a better chance of being seen as art than any in the former two. Comic strips didn't even start off as entertainment for children - it was that (oft forgotten) family entertainment. Adventure strips, romances, gag strips and dramas - they all populated the early newspaper page attempting to provide something for everyone. The comic strips' ties into panel gags in older magazines even belies a more adult origin. "Comics" problem is that they marginalized themselves (in the US at least and partially out of necessity). Note that any book that originally was published in paperback form (a form arising in the 1950s and as opposed to being serialized in a magazine or appearing first in hardback) was considered "trashy", so the problem isn't really format but perception (nowadays, the $12 trade paper back is the ideal for anything but the most likely sellers as its a profitable product*). Even still the classical arts have struggled with modern variations - there are many who wouldn't class an abstract artist as really being art, for example. I personally struggle with considering something like Duchamps' Fountain as art even if I intellectually understand the point of the piece, the emotive part of me that wants to connect with such a work refuses. I absolutely can't get behind the comic panel pop art of Roy Lichenstein because I don't think that portion of his work is properly transformative enough. Which kind of leads me into games; most games visual representation doesn't match the dynamics of a painting, a photograph or a film. The stories aren't complex enough generally speaking to compare with other narrative arts. The very fact that - even if a game was of the highest artistic value - the experiencing person has to play the game in order to find the art** will make it a tough nut to crack in terms of artistic merit (at least beyond those already inclined to see/experience the medium). In this sense I suppose I've never had any problem with spending my time and money on games provided I get something I enjoy out of it. So I can't say that I feel that I have "game shame", although occasionally the rare occasion I rather vitriolically dislike some game makes me think I'm spending to much time holding a negative passion against something. *Arguably, the commercial & disposable intentions of a new medium work against the majority seeing it as art which may explain why the early (commercial) years of any medium are so sparsely populated with well regarded works **interestingly, classical art has been slowly bringing in ideas of making the individual a part of the art itself something already achieved in a some way in games

"It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue."