Sand Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Actually, I do know all the classes. I don't know the PRESTIGE classes. HUGE difference. A class is a class, Volourn. May it be a reagular class, prestige class, or whatever. A rose of any other name and all that jazz. A full class list would include all prestige classes as well. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redfield Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Sure. Every genre comes with its own batch of clich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volourn Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 "A full class list would include all prestige classes as well." Nope. They have similarities but they are different. Full class list is Fighter/Spellcaster/Rogue. DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark_Raven Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 It is? Are you sure? Hades was the life of the party. RIP You'll be missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 I'm totally on Volo's side here. It's an odd feeling, but he's making a lot of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Nope. They have similarities but they are different. Full class list is Fighter/Spellcaster/Rogue. What are the differences then? You can a level, you become stronger and more skilled in a focused field. A class is a class. It doesn't matter if it is a "base" class, "advanced" class, or "prestige" class. A class is a class. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aries101 Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 We also know that dwarfes live underground and that elves life in tree-villages. well, there's a shocker! thank goodness Bio is taking such big risks. Yes, but you see the dwarves are not dwarfes in the D&D sense like the elves are not the High Elves of the Tolkien nor the D&D Universe. The elves may live in tree-villages but these villages are completely different from anything we've seen in a crpg in a very long time. I seem to remember a discussion about zombies and orcs in the game on the DA forums at the Bioware boards in which David Gaider mentioned that yes, there would be what we will call zombies in the game, but there really not zombies just like the orcs are not really like orcs...or what we know as or interpret as zombies or orcs... Please allow me to digress a little: As teacher I know that it is necessary to reach into a connection point in the students' consciousness meaning that I have to find somewhere in the brain (or consciousness) to connect the new things I'm going to teach them - else they will simply not learn it. The point is this: We, as crpgs, tend to interpret interpret orcs and elves, in the D&D connection or setting, since this is what we know. When, David Gaider, then comes along telling us, that yes, there will be dragons in dragon age, but not the dragons from D&D, we do have hard time takem this in, understanding this and what it really means. It is no different than the people in the medieval ages interpreting the toothwhale's tooth as the horn from a unicorn or sailors interpreting seamammals, sea-lions, seals or even dolphins as strange and mysterious underwater creatures such as mermaids and such -ehm- things? Hey, someone might even mistake a moose for a horse, if all they've ever been exposed to - that has four legs, a head and tail, is a horse. We tend to put new information into what we know is true - and when someone tells us soemthing we cannot fathom or understand - or wold split apart. Many Danes still think that LEGO is a Danish company. Well, it is. But only because it has its main adress in Denmark. The LEGO company has branches and affiliates allover the world, the same for B&O, the Danish Radio/TV company. Understanding this, sort of shatters the Danes belief system. Understanding that say the dragons, the orcs and the zombies in Dragon Are are different than the orcs etc. in D&D will be a belief shattering experience to some, if not all, players of the Dragon Age game. Please support http://www.maternityworldwide.org/ - and save a mother giving birth to a child. Please support, Andrew Bub, the gamerdad - at http://gamingwithchildren.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 6, 2008 Share Posted July 6, 2008 Sounds to me they are using the usual fantasy stereotypes in the game. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deraldin Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Yes, but you see the dwarves are not dwarfes in the D&D sense like the elves are not the High Elves of the Tolkien nor the D&D Universe. The elves may live in tree-villages but these villages are completely different from anything we've seen in a crpg in a very long time. I seem to remember a discussion about zombies and orcs in the game on the DA forums at the Bioware boards in which David Gaider mentioned that yes, there would be what we will call zombies in the game, but there really not zombies just like the orcs are not really like orcs...or what we know as or interpret as zombies or orcs... Is there anything more concrete about this? We "know" that they will be different, but do we have any specifics about how they differ? Until we have some concrete information on this, just saying that "they will be different" doesn't really confirm anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Besides, its always good to take what ever Bioware says with a grain of salt. They still don't have "Bring Down the Sky" available for the MEPC even though the box states it is "included." Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerSG Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Besides, its always good to take what ever Bioware says with a grain of salt. They still don't have "Bring Down the Sky" available for the MEPC even though the box states it is "included." Ahem, the box would be done by the publisher, that being EA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 EA is Bioware. Bioware is EA. In case you aren't in the know EA owns Bioware. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newc0253 Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 (edited) The elves may live in tree-villages but these villages are completely different from anything we've seen in a crpg in a very long time. you mean, like say the elf tree-village in BG2? sorry to be cynical, but how frakking different can tree-villages be? you got your ewok tree village, your gelfling tree village, your elven tree-village, your stephen donaldson tree people tree village, etc, etc. there's only so much you can do with the basic concept. i'm not doubting that Bio have put a lot of work into making their elves and dwarves different from elves and dwarves in other settings. i'm just saying oooh, tree villages, woop-de-frakking-doo. Edited July 7, 2008 by newc0253 dumber than a bag of hammers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slowtrain Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Wizardry 8 had an awesome tree village. My party members once fell off a catwalk and plummeted hundreds of feet to their deaths. Notice how I can belittle your beliefs without calling you names. It's a useful skill to have particularly where you aren't allowed to call people names. It's a mistake to get too drawn in/worked up. I mean it's not life or death, it's just two guys posting their thoughts on a message board. If it were personal or face to face all the usual restraints would be in place, and we would never have reached this place in the first place. Try to remember that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerSG Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 EA is Bioware. Bioware is EA. In case you aren't in the know EA owns Bioware. Well, technically, only the last part of your statement is true. Bioware is not EA, since Bioware does not constitute the entirety of EA. Nor is EA's business confined to Bioware, so the first part of your statement is false. Also, your statement overlooks that publishers and developers are two different entities when it comes to producing and packaging a product regardless of their business relationship, unless the two are the one and the same entity in entirety. So before using condescending remarks (intentional or not), ensure they are entirely accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Speaking of EA, I'm really liking their recent decisions. They are packaging Head Coach with Madden this year, and it looks to be well worth the extra dough. EA is off my naughty list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magister Lajciak Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 I am certainly looking forward to more information about the game on July 9th! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sand Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Well, technically, only the last part of your statement is true. Bioware is not EA, since Bioware does not constitute the entirety of EA. Nor is EA's business confined to Bioware, so the first part of your statement is false. Also, your statement overlooks that publishers and developers are two different entities when it comes to producing and packaging a product regardless of their business relationship, unless the two are the one and the same entity in entirety. So before using condescending remarks (intentional or not), ensure they are entirely accurate. They are the same entity. EA owns Bioware. They are the same company, same corporation. EA isn't just publishing Bioware's games. THEY OWN BIOWARE, completely and totally. Murphy's Law of Computer Gaming: The listed minimum specifications written on the box by the publisher are not the minimum specifications of the game set by the developer. @\NightandtheShape/@ - "Because you're a bizzare strange deranged human?" Walsingham- "Sand - always rushing around, stirring up apathy." Joseph Bulock - "Another headache, courtesy of Sand" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgoth Posted July 7, 2008 Author Share Posted July 7, 2008 Well, technically, only the last part of your statement is true. Bioware is not EA, since Bioware does not constitute the entirety of EA. Nor is EA's business confined to Bioware, so the first part of your statement is false. Also, your statement overlooks that publishers and developers are two different entities when it comes to producing and packaging a product regardless of their business relationship, unless the two are the one and the same entity in entirety. So before using condescending remarks (intentional or not), ensure they are entirely accurate. They are the same entity. EA owns Bioware. They are the same company, same corporation. EA isn't just publishing Bioware's games. THEY OWN BIOWARE, completely and totally. Yeah we know Hades. EA owns the company legally, but it's still the same people working there, still making Bioware games. And that's all that should matter to me - playing games from the same beloved developer. Besides I got the feeling that the Doctors, espescially Ray also has a lot of input for EA business - as an EA vice president, he's sort of an adviser to Riccitello. Rain makes everything better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelverin Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Speaking of EA, I'm really liking their recent decisions. They are packaging Head Coach with Madden this year, and it looks to be well worth the extra dough. EA is off my naughty list. They killed PC sports gaming. **** them J1 Visa Southern California Cleaning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerSG Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Well, technically, only the last part of your statement is true. Bioware is not EA, since Bioware does not constitute the entirety of EA. Nor is EA's business confined to Bioware, so the first part of your statement is false. Also, your statement overlooks that publishers and developers are two different entities when it comes to producing and packaging a product regardless of their business relationship, unless the two are the one and the same entity in entirety. So before using condescending remarks (intentional or not), ensure they are entirely accurate. They are the same entity. EA owns Bioware. They are the same company, same corporation. EA isn't just publishing Bioware's games. THEY OWN BIOWARE, completely and totally. No, to be the SAME entity, All of Bioware would have to be all of EA. That is what the word "same" means. Bioware (in corporate law terms) is a subsidiary of EA. Though, while we're on this, one with near complete creative autonomy by terms of the deal, and one of their execs sitting as an EA VP. So again, before you resort to condescending language, ensure you are accurate in your terms. And the MEPC port wasn't done by Bioware anyway. That's why the "Demiurge" logo is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Speaking of EA, I'm really liking their recent decisions. They are packaging Head Coach with Madden this year, and it looks to be well worth the extra dough. EA is off my naughty list. They killed PC sports gaming. **** them I think hockey will still be on the PC, but yeah, Madden is off the PC's. I'm not surprised, it sells an insane amount on consoles and is a much smaller part of the PC market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelverin Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 (edited) I think hockey will still be on the PC, but yeah, Madden is off the PC's. I'm not surprised, it sells an insane amount on consoles and is a much smaller part of the PC market.No hockey, football, baseball or basketball this year....not sure about Tiger Woods Well the games have been little more than roster updates on the PC so who can blame there sales loss. NHL 09 preview http://www.operationsports.com/preview.php?id=41 Edited July 7, 2008 by Kelverin J1 Visa Southern California Cleaning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newc0253 Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 (edited) sorry but aren't consoles inherently a better platform for sports games? i think PC gaming is alive and well but there's some types of games which seem to me better suited for consoles and sports is one of them. not because of the code, etc, but simply because they're almost always 2-player games, right? p.s. sorry to take this off-topic but until we have some actual DA info besides tree-frakking-villages, i figure this would be more interesting. Edited July 7, 2008 by newc0253 dumber than a bag of hammers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurlshort Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 Sports games have done well in the past on the PC, but they've struggled lately. Front Page Sports Football really did some amazing stuff that wasn't possible on the consoles at the time, and the NHL series pulled off 3d graphics successfully on the PC first. You will continue to see simulators (management games) probably stick to the PC as well. Without the technology edge (or rather a slim edge) the consoles have definitely pulled ahead though. I used to plug two controllers into a PC and play hockey with friends, but the TV is bigger and the consoles tend to come with controllers at the ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now