Let's get this straight, the games are good, if you consider them action/adventures. They suck horribly if you consider them to be RPGs. I'm still waiting for a really good oldschool RPG and have been for a very very long time now, there have been a few good ones in the last years (DAO and Drakensang come to mind), but nothing mindblowing that really sucked me in.
Also the scores given by most reviewing sites seem to be "bought" even IGN and Gamespot reviews aren't reliable anymore, I've seen one crappy game too many get a good score, even when the review bashes the game and, usually it's games with publishers like EA or Ubisoft, I wonder why?
The only way to get a feeling of how a game does is to visit forums after release (I tend to check the developer's forums and the Steam forums), and even there you need to be careful for company shills and retarded fanboyism, of course the inverse also happens there, in either case, bring lots of salt.
Amen bro, amen. Give us proper successors to franchises like Fallout, Baldur's Gate and Plancescape: Torment not these action adventures you've been cooking up lately Bioware.
Boo is disappointed Bioware, very disappointed. And you wouldn't want to disappoint Boo even further...
Because all the people expecting an RPG will ditch it after half an hour?
Bioware sold out, they're producing action adventures nowadays (pretty good ones, at that), but not RPGs. I wonder if they have any loyal supporters left from the Planescape days, probably not many after this.
That said, I'll do my best to work through this not expecting a proper RPG and pretending it's not the successor to a game that claimed to be the spiritual successor to the Baldur's Gate series, I might enjoy it then.
For a proper RPG, I dunno, maybe Skyrim will deliver, for now I'm sticking to Drakensang for my RPG fix.
We have an internet provider called Skynet over here (Belgium), and it definitely is not powered by any kind of brain related things, greed on the other hand...
And where exactly is he unthankful for what the US Army does? Doesn't he have the right to be upset when his government illegally uses the Army to serve their own selfish agenda thereby willingly letting soldiers die for no particular reason at all? And you are upset when someone exposes said corrupt government? I guess you would rather not know that they don't hesitate to send good men to their deaths without any justification but their own greed?
I am sure that the relatives to all those soldiers that lost their lives (and still lose their lives) in a war that was entirely avoidable and entirely inspired by the greed of a few disagree.
Keep people entertained (the more braindead the entertainment the better) and keep them fed and they won't give a damn about what you do. And they won't give a damn when you make those that do give a damn disappear in plain sight. Worked wonders for the Roman empire...
Oh, soon enough we won't be known as "resources" anymore, just as "costs" and they'll just outsource everything, which will then massively backfire, but by then they've cashed in that nice fat bonus and you're out of a job.
They could also just require you to be logged into their service to play multiplayer; forcing people to be online for singleplayer is a retarded policy. Some of us are regularly in hotels and we don't always have a network connection (and if we do there's no guarantee the connection is any good), or your provider might have some big outage etc etc.
Forcing people to be online for an offline game or offline play is just a big no-no.
I don't get why people consider 7 to be better than Vista. It's the same OS, the same underpinnings (the same bloat), just a different UI and a minor version increase, so even Microsoft doesn't consider it a different version...
Because it's usually companies that still run XP, and a lot of them aren't exactly jumping to adopt Vista or Vista SE, I mean, Windows 7. Alienating your corporate customers usually is not a good idea.
The only reason for anyone to upgrade past XP is 64bit support, there is nothing else. And the only reason most users NEED said 64bit support is because the new Windows versions eat your ram like there's no tomorrow to start with.
Gee, and here I thought it was related to this thing that sets humans apart from other animals, our natural curiosity and willingness to try things that at first glance seem to have no real benefit.
When I stated that traditional RPGs are dead it should be noted that that means there are no (or barely any) new titles, not that the old ones aren't still around and kicking.
Then again, the definition of RPG is so vague that you could make Doom pass it with a little effort. When most of us think RPG though we consider either hack & slash dungeon crawlers (Nethack, Icewind Dale, Diablo and MUDs from the sond of it) or Baldur's Gate style (Dragon Age: Origins, Planescape: Torment) story-driven RPGs not the current generation of shooters with a few usually simplified RPG elements.
Slashdot Mirror
Mafia 2 pulled the same stunt for what it's worth (also not a Bioware game).
Let's get this straight, the games are good, if you consider them action/adventures. They suck horribly if you consider them to be RPGs. I'm still waiting for a really good oldschool RPG and have been for a very very long time now, there have been a few good ones in the last years (DAO and Drakensang come to mind), but nothing mindblowing that really sucked me in.
Also the scores given by most reviewing sites seem to be "bought" even IGN and Gamespot reviews aren't reliable anymore, I've seen one crappy game too many get a good score, even when the review bashes the game and, usually it's games with publishers like EA or Ubisoft, I wonder why?
The only way to get a feeling of how a game does is to visit forums after release (I tend to check the developer's forums and the Steam forums), and even there you need to be careful for company shills and retarded fanboyism, of course the inverse also happens there, in either case, bring lots of salt.
Amen bro, amen. Give us proper successors to franchises like Fallout, Baldur's Gate and Plancescape: Torment not these action adventures you've been cooking up lately Bioware.
Boo is disappointed Bioware, very disappointed. And you wouldn't want to disappoint Boo even further...
Hmm, I wonder if there is a connection... Naaah, EA would never screw over a very loyal fanbase just to make more money...
Because all the people expecting an RPG will ditch it after half an hour?
Bioware sold out, they're producing action adventures nowadays (pretty good ones, at that), but not RPGs. I wonder if they have any loyal supporters left from the Planescape days, probably not many after this.
That said, I'll do my best to work through this not expecting a proper RPG and pretending it's not the successor to a game that claimed to be the spiritual successor to the Baldur's Gate series, I might enjoy it then.
For a proper RPG, I dunno, maybe Skyrim will deliver, for now I'm sticking to Drakensang for my RPG fix.
We have an internet provider called Skynet over here (Belgium), and it definitely is not powered by any kind of brain related things, greed on the other hand...
Apple always has been, it's just that nowadays they suddenly have the market leverage to actually act upon it.
And where exactly is he unthankful for what the US Army does? Doesn't he have the right to be upset when his government illegally uses the Army to serve their own selfish agenda thereby willingly letting soldiers die for no particular reason at all? And you are upset when someone exposes said corrupt government? I guess you would rather not know that they don't hesitate to send good men to their deaths without any justification but their own greed?
I am sure that the relatives to all those soldiers that lost their lives (and still lose their lives) in a war that was entirely avoidable and entirely inspired by the greed of a few disagree.
Surely you mean "just following orders" is what the SS-soldiers had to say for themselves (literal translation is "orders are orders").
Bread and games.
Keep people entertained (the more braindead the entertainment the better) and keep them fed and they won't give a damn about what you do. And they won't give a damn when you make those that do give a damn disappear in plain sight. Worked wonders for the Roman empire...
Oh, soon enough we won't be known as "resources" anymore, just as "costs" and they'll just outsource everything, which will then massively backfire, but by then they've cashed in that nice fat bonus and you're out of a job.
Because Google didn't want you to, obviously...
IM > Telephone, at least it allows you to finish what you were doing, unlike that bloody telephone that has to be picked up immediately.
They could also just require you to be logged into their service to play multiplayer; forcing people to be online for singleplayer is a retarded policy. Some of us are regularly in hotels and we don't always have a network connection (and if we do there's no guarantee the connection is any good), or your provider might have some big outage etc etc.
Forcing people to be online for an offline game or offline play is just a big no-no.
They didn't, if you would have read the actual article(s). She basically impersonated Aaron Barr to get privileged access to some machines.
Legions of Visual Basic coders disagree... Thus your point is proven valid...
Yes, it's down for me with that message as well. Guess QT is hawt stuff...
I don't get why people consider 7 to be better than Vista. It's the same OS, the same underpinnings (the same bloat), just a different UI and a minor version increase, so even Microsoft doesn't consider it a different version...
Because it's usually companies that still run XP, and a lot of them aren't exactly jumping to adopt Vista or Vista SE, I mean, Windows 7. Alienating your corporate customers usually is not a good idea.
The only reason for anyone to upgrade past XP is 64bit support, there is nothing else. And the only reason most users NEED said 64bit support is because the new Windows versions eat your ram like there's no tomorrow to start with.
Gee, and here I thought it was related to this thing that sets humans apart from other animals, our natural curiosity and willingness to try things that at first glance seem to have no real benefit.
When I stated that traditional RPGs are dead it should be noted that that means there are no (or barely any) new titles, not that the old ones aren't still around and kicking.
Then again, the definition of RPG is so vague that you could make Doom pass it with a little effort. When most of us think RPG though we consider either hack & slash dungeon crawlers (Nethack, Icewind Dale, Diablo and MUDs from the sond of it) or Baldur's Gate style (Dragon Age: Origins, Planescape: Torment) story-driven RPGs not the current generation of shooters with a few usually simplified RPG elements.
I guess I should have been clearer, though
And traditional PC RPGs are dead, RIP.
They could do like Emacs, and just drop the major version number (reference).
Makes this "PC" thing running "MS Windows" not seem so bad after all eh?
Ooooh, do bats count too? Your f(r)iend Ozzy