Amentep

Wouldnt' really surprise me. The franchise has been heading in the ludicrous direction, content-wise, for a while. FO4: Moonbase Alpha. Can't wait. Don't you mean ?

Didn't play the first one; see no reason to change that with the second.

Yeah they've said repeatedly the PC combat isn't changing - its hard to believe how much argument is coming about the "dumbing" down of PC games over this though...

I beat TOB once. I also beat BG1 once (and had to cheat to do that... ) Got a bit further in Lego Harry Potter over the weekend.

Well, not anymore.

So tell me Vol, where exactly were you when I was playing Dragon Age? Because in those three cases the first time I played I almost lost my party (and did totally in the fourth case) and I don't remember you being there. But thanks for the compliment on my gaming skills (even if you overestimate them)!

Yeah, I'd forgotten about that, that did make groin shots useful. Not sure how that could translate into a non-turn based game.

Going for the eye was quite useful but that was it, really. I don't think I've ever aimed for anything else in Fallout and Fallout 2.. except maybe.. the head. It was useful, but as Thorton_AP pointed out you got an insta kill out of it a lot of times if you hit. And in my experience when I blinded them and not kill them, they ran away.

I don't think its been officially classed as "tyte" yet, though, so maybe there's hope? I'm actually pretty sure Alvin said the game is tyte. The game is going to get canceled Oops...

Most of the time I didn't. Even when I went to cripple a leg from a running opponent, most of the time (after the beginning of the game at least) I killed them by blowing their leg off. Would be nice if there was a reason to subdue opponents or something that came out of crippling them if you played that way, but there just isn't. To be fair though, there really isn't a reason to shoot for the extremities in the other FO games either. At least my experience was injuring an arm, leg, blinding or knocking a weapon out of their hands usually resulted in them trying to run, which then cued up the tedium of chasing them down.

Starfish - the makers of Elminage - made an earlier DS Wizardry title. That said there seem to be a few companies doing "Wizardry like" games in Japan as well (and a few come out here like Class of Heroes or The Dark Spire).

Have your NPCs run into the bonfire in the first attack, have them run outside of the circle in the second attack, have them separated in the dungeon in the infiltration when the skeletons get triggered. I got killed though once in gate area, my team separated and triggered all the darkspawn in the area, who proceeded to bash me.

I don't think its been officially classed as "tyte" yet, though, so maybe there's hope?

As I understand it, the original Sir-Tech games were hugely popular in Japan and the name was licensed by a number of companies over the years for a variety of Wizardry "side story" games (Tales of the Forsaken land was actually made by Racdyn/Racjin, published by Atlus in the US. I'm not 100% certain it was Atlus who published it in Japan though). From what I've read, IPM Inc. bought the rights to the Wizardry name from Sir-Tech and are planning what they call a "Wizardry Renaissance". Since IPM isn't a developer their games are being developed by other companies. Genterprise is doing the DS game "Wizardry: Pledge of Life" while Acquire seem to be doing the game released on the PS3 ("Wizardry: Dungeon of Imprisoned Souls"?). Their parent company is a MMO maker and I believe a Wizardry MMO is planned as well.

I confess I may very well be a failure at the mathematics I trained in since its been ten years (almost 11) since I did jack-all with it (but I can always impress people with the degree, none the less). I will say that in my previous foray in the thread with WoD, I got the nagging feeling that we're talking at cross purposes; ie he and I (and we in general) are not setting the issue the same way in our minds and thus not finding a common ground to discuss. But I couldn't pinpoint where I think the communication problem lays and without going totally to mathematical notation so we don't get lost in semantics, I'm not sure how to resolve the issue.

If you're saying the chance of "you" winning is worse than the chance of "not you" winning amid players of the lottery than that's true. If you're saying the chance of "you" winning is worse than the chance of "some other person" who bought the same amount of lottery tickets for the same lottery, then that's not true as you each would have the same chance. Or, lets say you are A1 and all the lottery players in the world are A2, A3, A4....An and each person bought one ticket and the odds are calculated that there is a 1/105 chance to win. Then chance of winning is the same for A1, A2, A3, A4....An so the chance of A1 winning is the same as An. So the chance of "you" (A1) winning is the same as "some other person" (An) But the chance of "you" (A1) winning is much less than the rest of the group (which stands at An-1/105 IIRC).

Not in the contest that said person is entering. That said, he kinda takes that into account in the fact that calculating the odds of one person winning requires calculating their odds against other members in the contest. And to be technical, the chances of SOMEBODY winning are 1. The chances of somebody winning are 1 only if every combination of lottery number has been purchased (otherwise someone would be winning the lottery every time the lottery is done). A smaller scale version of this: Lets say out of a deck of cards the Ace of Spades is the winning card; you'd need 52 people picking cards to insure a winner. Lets say you have 27 people, then each person has a 1 in 52 chance of being a winner, but there's a 27/52 chance that the winner is actually still in the deck.

Wizardry has always been a beloved franchise in Japan, they've done a lot of upgraded ports of the game, a PS2 game which from what I've heard was actually quite good (and had certainly a better and cleaner art direction than the awful one of Wiz 8, though I know most won't agree with me) and there's also another title that's been developed for next-gen (though we should actually call them 'now-gen' but let's leave this semantics debate to some other topics) consoles. I liked Wizardry: Tale of a Forsaken Land "okay". Its battle system was superior to Wiz8 IMO, but it had its own sorta weird elements I didn't like. Still I enjoy games of its type and wish more would come out (I've been slowly working through Class of Heroes for a few months off and on). Am excited about Tactics Ogre remake, never though I'd see the day to be honest.

I was happy that I saved the kid and the wife. Would have thought it was cool if the "order" mattered though (like how after the first completed section Lothering disappears, or the advancing horde on the minimap, it'd have been neat to see certain quests resolve differently depending on order - like in this case only being able to save the kid if you'd saved the Mages prior to going into Redwall).

I went to Redcliffe first in my game. I had no idea that I could count on a different plot area to save Connor while I had to deal with it. The unfortunate thing is that they don't make you choose there (as they should have), but unless you've already been to the Mage Tower, it's a pretty baffling roleplaying decision to not do something. Pretty much metagaming IMO. I wouldn't be surprised if people typically clear out an area before moving on to the next, if they can. I did the same in Alpha Protocol as well. I went to Redcliffe first, but somehow came up with the idea of getting the Mage's help (don't remember exact convo). Since I didn't like the two choices given (kill the kid, kill the wife to save the kid), I went with the third option. When I got to the Mage's tower I had to clear it and I was really worried that I'd end up taking too long and the kid would have killed everyone by the time I got back. (IE if you clear the Mage tower first the mages will help you and save the kid, but if you do it second then the kid kills everyone because of the time taken to clear the tower). Made the whole thing kinda interesting, not knowing.

I've wondered for some time whether Flemeth takes over Morrigan by the end of the game regardless of your actions, to be honest. The whole initial surprise from Morrigan over being forced to go with the Warden then a last minute reveal that Morrigan knew all along and it was all a plot by Flemeth made me wonder if it was a plot, but only to insinuate Morrigan in the party while Flemeth prepared to take her over and get the opportunity to do the Dark Ritual. That Morrigan still goes along with Flemeth's plan even after killing Flemeth just struck me as potentially at odds with Morrigan at the begining of the game.

I already have it, but I'll get it again. Hope they don't nerf Gorgons like they did in Knight of Lodis...(hope they still have Gorgons since they're rebuilding from the ground up).

I actually like the character design for the game, personally.

Not exactly; Edea was possessed by Ultimecia (as was Adel and as was other witches through the ages IIRC). That's why I since Flemeth's modus operandi is to take possession of other magic users... Anyhow, Edea had black hair: Adel had red hair: and Ultimecia had white hair:

she looks like that witch from final fantasy 8, the name escapes me. but, yeah, I'd have to agree, these screenshots remind me of Square's CGIs a lot Ultimecia, who projected herself back in time and took over a variety of witch's body to further her own ends...?