Maria Caliban Posted September 17, 2009 Posted September 17, 2009 From the BioBoards -- Markinator123 "When is this out. I can't wait to play it so I can talk at length about how bad it is." - Gorgon.
entrerix Posted September 24, 2009 Posted September 24, 2009 That is definitely how it should have been in the first game. Personally, I think it Killing is kind of like playin' a basketball game. I am there. and the other player is there. and it's just the two of us. and I put the other player's body in my van. and I am the winner. - Nice Pete.
Gfted1 Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 Wasnt that fairly common until recently? In BGII, if you take the evil people (Edwin, Korgan) they got pissy when you did good things (raised rep) and left if it got too high for too long, and vice versa with the good people. "I'm your biggest fan, Ill follow you until you love me, Papa"
Purkake Posted September 25, 2009 Author Posted September 25, 2009 Isn't everything new just something old put into a new shiny box?
Oner Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 Wasn't that fairly common until recently? In BGII, if you take the evil people (Edwin, Korgan) they got pissy when you did good things (raised rep) and left if it got too high for too long, and vice versa with the good people.They're talking about personalities while fighting, not C&C. Isn't everything new just something old put into a new shiny box?Nope. Giveaway list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DgyQFpOJvyNASt8A12ipyV_iwpLXg_yltGG5mffvSwo/edit?usp=sharing What is glass but tortured sand?Never forget! '12.01.13.
alanschu Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 Fallout 2's personalities were done simply by what types of tactics were available to them though, right?
Slowtrain Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 Fallout 2's personalities were done simply by what types of tactics were available to them though, right? I would reverse that and say that the combacy tactics were dictated by personailty type. Myron the wimpy scientist had distinctly different settable combat options, mostly variations of "Piss trousers and run", from Sulik. 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.
Oner Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 Yeah. Still, the illusion is more than nothing. Giveaway list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DgyQFpOJvyNASt8A12ipyV_iwpLXg_yltGG5mffvSwo/edit?usp=sharing What is glass but tortured sand?Never forget! '12.01.13.
alanschu Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 Fallout 2's personalities were done simply by what types of tactics were available to them though, right? I would reverse that and say that the combacy tactics were dictated by personailty type. Myron the wimpy scientist had distinctly different settable combat options, mostly variations of "Piss trousers and run", from Sulik. My statement was more along the lines of, the combat personalities were dictated by the options you set in their tactics and whatnot. That is, if you could set Vic and Cassidy to the same thing, they'd behave identically in combat, despite personality differences. We're both just saying the same thing.
Amentep Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 Wait, the companions in Fallout 2 actually did something based on what tactics you gave them? I never experienced that. Seemed like regardless of what I requested of them, they were mostly there to accidentally shoot me, get accidentally shot by me, or to inexplicably use the melee weapon in combat instead of the gun I gave them despite me telling them to equip and use it, setting up a scenario where they'd rush in get shot to death by everybody in the firefight. I cannot - yet I must. How do you calculate that? At what point on the graph do "must" and "cannot" meet? Yet I must - but I cannot! ~ Ro-Man
alanschu Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 That might be the case haha. I don't really remember. All I really remember (and I might not even be right!) is giving them permission to (or not to) burst fire.
Oner Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 Burst or not, distance from you/enemies, chem use, who to target, weapon usage (melee only, melee then ranged, ranged then melee, ranged only) could be set. The problem was, "make absolutely sure you don't hit me" only applied to you, not the every party member. Giveaway list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DgyQFpOJvyNASt8A12ipyV_iwpLXg_yltGG5mffvSwo/edit?usp=sharing What is glass but tortured sand?Never forget! '12.01.13.
Slowtrain Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 (edited) DP Edited September 25, 2009 by Slowtrain 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.
Slowtrain Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 (edited) argh. Edited September 25, 2009 by Slowtrain 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.
Slowtrain Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 Fallout 2's personalities were done simply by what types of tactics were available to them though, right? I would reverse that and say that the combacy tactics were dictated by personailty type. Myron the wimpy scientist had distinctly different settable combat options, mostly variations of "Piss trousers and run", from Sulik. My statement was more along the lines of, the combat personalities were dictated by the options you set in their tactics and whatnot. That is, if you could set Vic and Cassidy to the same thing, they'd behave identically in combat, despite personality differences. We're both just saying the same thing. Gotcha. And yeah, that would probably be true, though there was quite a bit of variation, on what options were available for each player character and also how effecdtive they were within those parameters. You could set both Cassidy and Myron to some sort of similar attack from range thing but Cassidy would blow the crap out of people while Myron was still pretty useless. 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.
alanschu Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 Well that makes sense. Scope is going to kick people's ass more than Igor. Cassidy is just a more effective NPC.
Oner Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 At shooting yes, but he can't make stimpacks. Or annoy you to death. His death. Giveaway list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DgyQFpOJvyNASt8A12ipyV_iwpLXg_yltGG5mffvSwo/edit?usp=sharing What is glass but tortured sand?Never forget! '12.01.13.
alanschu Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 He can annoy himself to death. As in, if he annoys himself by taking drugs >.>
Oner Posted September 25, 2009 Posted September 25, 2009 He can annoy himself to death. As in, if he annoys himself by taking drugs >.>My monstrous personality found that hilarious. Giveaway list: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DgyQFpOJvyNASt8A12ipyV_iwpLXg_yltGG5mffvSwo/edit?usp=sharing What is glass but tortured sand?Never forget! '12.01.13.
Tel Aviv Posted September 26, 2009 Posted September 26, 2009 (edited) Holy potato! Subject Zero, eh? Another renegade. Where are all the nice people at? Also, 10 party members is confirmed. Edited September 26, 2009 by Tel Aviv
WILL THE ALMIGHTY Posted September 26, 2009 Posted September 26, 2009 (edited) OH YEAH SHE'S HARDCORE. **** YEAH BADASS PUNK BITCH WOOT. I think that put me off playing the game. Edited September 26, 2009 by WILL THE ALMIGHTY "Alright, I've been thinking. When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade - make life take the lemons back! Get mad! I don't want your damn lemons, what am I supposed to do with these? Demand to see life's manager. Make life rue the day it thought it could give Cave Johnson lemons. Do you know who I am? I'm the man who's gonna burn your house down! With the lemons. I'm going to to get my engineers to invent a combustible lemon that burns your house down!"
jaguars4ever Posted September 26, 2009 Posted September 26, 2009 Is (s)he romanceable? If it's really a fish, the mating could be interesting. If she really is a romanceable fish, then all my excursions below the equator would not have been for naught.
Purkake Posted September 26, 2009 Author Posted September 26, 2009 Apparently took the "everyone's crazy" theme and run with it from DA to ME2.
Hell Kitty Posted September 26, 2009 Posted September 26, 2009 I think that put me off playing the game. Yeah, I thought it was pretty embarrassing. If ME2 doesn't allow me to continue with my paragon character then I probably won't bother with it.
Deadly_Nightshade Posted September 26, 2009 Posted September 26, 2009 Subject Zero, eh? She looks like a few friends of mine - albeit with a few less clothes a few more, but not many more, tattoos. "Geez. It's like we lost some sort of bet and ended up saddled with a bunch of terrible new posters on this forum." -Hurlshot
Recommended Posts