Topics about your Games Locked Today

[melkathi]

Dear obsidianites, obsididudes, obsididudettes and other denominations,

today the following topics ran their allotted length and had to be locked:

The RANDOM VIDEO GAME NEWS topic, in its 30th August iteration by Gorth reached an unwieldy length and was locked at 35 pages and re-opened and re-imagined by TrueNeutral in the 27th October version
 
The The Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt topic's 16th June edition by Rosbjerg reached a similar length (though not quite as far as the RVGN topic) and was locked at 34 pages. It too was re-launched by TrueNeutral with a 27th October interpretation.

 

What do you think of the new version? Have they improved on the tried and true formula? Are they being innovative enough? Do they depart too much of what fans of the IPs have grown to expect? Discuss

[Chilloutman]

I sense censorship to be honest

[Fenixp]

There will come time when some people will see the dated versions of these topics with rose-tinted glasses and think "Darn, that version of RANDOM VIDEO GAME NEWS from 30th August of 2016 was so good. Not like this newfangled, boring version from 23rd January of 2018." Truth of the matter is, roster updates are necessary and higher dates behind names of things always mean that the thing is better than the one with the lower date. One of these days, the topics will become red (because, as we all surely know, red goes fasta!) and this'll bring them to perfection.
 
Now if you don't mind staying with me for a little bit longer, I'd like to offer you BETTER RANDOM VIDEO GAME NEWS. This DLC is an addition to the 27th October version of RANDOM VIDEO GAME NEWS and adds such revolutionary features as RSS feed for mere $5.99. You may also purchase "Non-irritation package" for $20 which removes presence of any members you might choose from the topic. And for mere $60, you may get a season pass which'll contain these two pieces of DLC and any future content!

DLC from 30th August version doesn't work for 23rd January version. As a member of Obsidian community, you're granted 30 days of no money back guarantee. Any further DLC may or may not be released.

 

....

 

Anyway, isn't it about time to reboot the screenshots thread too?

Edited October 27, 2016 by Fenixp

[melkathi]

Screenshot thread is only at 22 pages. But with the new Mordheim DLC I think I can get it to lockable length in no time

[sorophx]

well, someone is definitely bored, that I can say for certain. and it's not I 

[Blarghagh]

[WDeranged]

Cheap cash grab if you ask me...did you ask me? 

[Mamoulian War]

well, someone is definitely bored, that I can say for certain. and it's not I

Man, I feel for you. What happened?

[Rosbjerg]

-This Message Is Sponsored-

Well I personally think that the new series are a lot better, sure some features were dropped and on average they're fairly content light, but it's safe to say that they are much more popular and the more streamlined content can really be seen as way to add to the forumites' in-thread agency.

[Gizmo]

The The Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt topic's 16th June edition by Rosbjerg reached a similar length (though not quite as far as the RVGN topic) and was locked at 34 pages. It too was re-launched by TrueNeutral with a 27th October interpretation.

 

What do you think of the new version? Have they improved on the tried and true formula? Are they being innovative enough? Do they depart too much of what fans of the IPs have grown to expect? Discuss

IMO Witcher series was terminally messed up starting with Witcher 2.  Geralt was no longer himself; no longer pragmatic, and no longer an accomplished swordsman. Playing the game meant [essentially] playing out of character.  The series lost the ability to jump, lost the tactical sword styles, lost the commonsense use of potions; lost the depth of the alchemy system; lost the multi-camera system, and kept only the useless one. They replaced all the bar-fights with 'Whack-A-Mole' [Quicktime events].

 

[Not to mention they somehow screwed up the dice game]

 

I think W1 was the best RPG in the last decade; while W2 only looked the part.    

[melkathi]

*blink* A serious post. How did that end up here

[Zoraptor]

I found Gizmo's post of 5.40am NZST 5/11/2016  to be an interesting take on the 'serious post' oeuvre. It started, as most such serious posts do, with setting out the opinion of the poster, in this case that the 'The Witcher' series of computer role playing games has declined in quality after the first one. Since this is a controversial view I was glad to see the use of the acronym and qualifier 'IMO' (In My Opinion) to reduce the confrontation inherent in such a radical interpretation. He/ She/ [pronoun] then moved on to setting out the reasons for his opinion- a sensible and some would say obligatory step in any analysis that is sadly often neglected in these times of brief twitter posts and single line sarcastic or inflammatory drive bys on forums. While I may have appreciated a little more detail in some areas the point was conveyed effectively and with brevity; which is, after all, the soul of wit.

 

Perhaps my only criticism of the post is that there was no commentary on 'The Witcher 3' and whether it was an improvement or not over 'The Witcher 2'. My presumption is that Gizmo did not in fact play 'The Witcher 3', perhaps after disliking 'The Witcher 2', however, some clarification would have been appreciated.

 

Having said that I have to end with a final positive observation and appreciation for the presence of a short statement of summary and conclusion at post end; another facet of forum posting that is in sad decline. Overall I liked the post and rate it a perfect 7/9, though due to the review policy of this august institution I did not of course officially like the post.

Edited November 4, 2016 by Zoraptor

[Gizmo]

Perhaps my only criticism of the post is that there was no commentary on 'The Witcher 3' and whether it was an improvement or not over 'The Witcher 2'. My presumption is that Gizmo did not in fact play 'The Witcher 3', perhaps after disliking 'The Witcher 2', however, some clarification would have been appreciated.

It's true that I haven't really [really] played W3 yet, and so I cannot make an informed comment on whether it surpasses Witcher 2. [Here is a word: Ultracrepidarian ]

 I do have all three installed.

 

 

In W3 I've not played far past the tutorial region [if I've left it at all**], but the basic mechanics [i presume] are the ones on display, and I could see well enough that the game seems inclined more towards W2 than W1.  The problem for me is that nearly everything especially I liked of the series is in Witcher 1, and absent in Witcher 2. 

 

**It's not for not wanting to play, it's a time thing. I do plan to play it when I can.

 

Aside:

 

It's rather the same situation between Fallout 2, and FO3; and Wasteland and WL2; and Bard's Tale 1/2/3, and BT4*...  It just seems like rather than building on the series' foundation, they've each started from scratch, and with different intentions for an almost unrelated game ~yet each calls it a sequel, and plays off the original's fame and reputation.

 

*BT4 looks utterly superb, and is still under wraps; but IMO, it does seem very, very thinly related to the Bard's Tale series ~so far. [bT4 Backer, and still looking forward to it.]

 

 

Edited November 4, 2016 by Gizmo

[Hurlshort]

I love this place.