The way bases are paid for are using a new in-game currency called Prestige, which is earned in the same way that Influence/Infamy (the currencies used for heroes and villains respectively), but only while playing in supergroup mode (that is, while "flying group colors").
Prestige is an interesting concept. Unlike influence, you don't gain vastly more as you go up in level and defeat stronger foes, so even low-level group members can contribute to the total. Groups gain a bonus of 20,000 prestige for every member up to the first 15 (groups can have up to 75 members total), but groups also LOSE prestige at the same rate if they lose members so they're under 15.
Prestige gain rates is unusually slow relative to the prices of base options; reading the boards seems to indicate that earning 500-600 a mission is common. Getting your base and initial plot (containing one, tiny room with a teleporter in it) is free, but even adding the smallest of additional rooms costs 100,000 prestige! Larger lots, bigger rooms, and the devices that actually make your base into a playable area for opposing teams to attack very quickly raise costs up into the millions of prestige. Decoration items are fairly cheap, on the other hand, but most groups won't have enough room to add many of those for quite some time.
On the other hand, losing prestige is somewhat difficult. Selling base items back (in a manner that is amusingly like selling stuff out of your apartment in The Sims) returns every penny of prestige spent. Having large bases (value over 1M prestige) entails paying a monthly rent to keep everything working, but that's the only prestige cost in the game other than just buying stuff.
So, it seems clear that base development is intended to be a long-term goal for a group, which is great for a game that previously that little in the way of goals other than gaining experience, tricking out your enhancement slots, and finishing whatever mission/task force/badge collection you're working on at that moment.
I'm in the middle of playing it, and quest variety, while really still really low for starting characters, has gone up as of late. In addition to "defeat everyone" missions, there are rescue missions now, some missions that require you to protect an objective, some of the task forces have very unusual elements. (The first Terra Volta respec TF leaps to mind -- in the final area, you and your teammates have to protect a reactor against nine or ten waves of foes, but you also have to ensure the reactor doesn't go critical by using coolant on it, AND you have to keep your radiation shield charged or start taking damage rapidly.... of course the charger is some distance from the reactor itself.)
But the PvP areas seem to be a major selling point to both games, now. There are three of these areas, and they each have some major element to them that makes them different from the other areas: Siren's Call has a big "battle for the neighborhood" theme mixed in with the PvP, Warburg sends the players on elaborate collection hunts to gain use-any-time orbital missile strikes, and Bloody Bay allows heroes to attack other heroes, and villains to attack villains.
It all seems fairly cool to me, but then again I'm still a relatively new player. I don't yet know how much of all this will become old hat after a few more months of play....
Could it be the same principle used in this?
on
Set PHASRs On Stun
·
· Score: 1
Some scientists are using a kind of paddle-wand that can selectively, non-invasively, and according to them harmlessly deactivate portions of someone's brain. They're using it to run experiments in which someone's sense of sight is temporarily deactivated, to try to get information on the phenomonon of "blind-sight," a sort of rudimentary sense of the location and presence of objects not directly seen.
This is a guess of course, and other than what's in this article I know nothing about it. But I thought it was kind of weird that I should read about this, and then two weeks later someone announces a weapon that can blind someone....
I'll know it's working if it ranks me up near the top. Yeah, that'll be what decides it. If gives me any of that "below average" stuff I'll know it's utter crap.
More seriously, FINALLY, an idea concerning X-Box 360 that I actually like.
The original quote is obviously spoken by someone utterly fed up with making movie property games. Lucasfilm used to be known for making some absolutely brilliant things; not only did they make what are regarded by many to be the best graphical adventures, but it was also in their halls where was created what may very well have been the first true graphical virtual world.
To see them reduced to the endless milking of a pair of movie licenses, no matter how culturally significant they may be, is saddening.
Upon reading your post I went out and download the demo and played it.
The voice acting, it turns out, is quite *good*, and it's obvious that an absurd amount of time went into having characters' mouths and body language match what's said. Considering that most 3D games are content with just changing the facial texture whenever a character has to speak (Ivy's laugh in the SoulCalibur games is unintentionally freaky because of this), and I have to say, Telltale has done a great job on that.
The graphics are 3D, which is very rare for this kind of game, but works fairly well. Although they *are* a bit simplistic, they fit the style of the comic perfectly.
And I was quite impressed with the writing in what I had seen so far. So... I honestly don't see what you don't like about it, I guess.
When I was reading the article "480-Pound Woman Dies After Six Years On Couch" (second link)...
That's the most depressing thing I've heard in months!
No, I've never been too interested in the Darwin Awards either. There is something about the death of an actual human being which I cannot laugh at. Call me a killjoy, maybe....
A game system that makes billions of dollars for its parent corporation, but has nary a game I like, is a failure from my point of view. Multiply that by millions of similarly-thinking people, and that's the world in five years.
It's possible to have a "successful" system, by your definition, that does not achieve great market penetration, which in fact DOES matter: publishers look at that to determine which systems to publish for. Hence Nintendo, who did arguably the best in profitability this generation, is in third place. Also, public reaction, not profitability, transfers over to the next-next generation's playing field.
I won't even get into the long-term effects of sponsoring quality game design and what it means for the industry as a whole to get mired into copying the same game mechanics over and over and over again... but arguably, that's an extremely important consideration.
Oh, and believe it or not, "believe it or not" is a greatly overused rebuttal phrase -- I know, because I've greatly overused it myself. But I'm recovering.
Wow, what is it with the -1 Overrated scores on these posts? Aren't there better uses for mod points than marking down an explanatory comment like this one?
Have you any played Final Fantasy 7 in Windows ? The game is compelling in the extreme. It has an interesting storyline, great gameplay, and still manages to look good even today (mainly because it never tried to look realistic to begin with).
Wow, I disagree with almost all those points.
However, it is also buggy. Having Direct3D acceleration on makes it to crash about once an hour (every fifteen minutes in earlier versions). This turns the game into a panicked look for the next savepoint, before the inevitable crash, and thrusts the gameplay into the background.
Zonk's review was of a game that had nowhere near this bad a problem. He actually said that he would give it a 10/10 except that he was trying to be "honest." Me, I'd say that 10/10 is the honest score, and 8/10 is second-guessing himself.
Technical problems should take a back seat, in my opinion, if the game itself is compelling enough. It seems obvious, reading your review, that it'd be more accurate if the score was a 9. Games that are works of art deserve special consideration over "frame rate hitch when three demons shoot fireballs at once" types of things.
Ocarina of Time fully deserved the 10s it got from many places, even though the game is not perfect, from a technical perspective.
If it really is what MS is trying to do, I think it's a master stroke on their part.
A master stroke? Fact is, everyone wants to be able to say their stuff is a sell-out hit. Nintendo pulled these shenanigans with copies of Mario 3 back in their "evil period." If Microsoft were confident in the 360's success, they wouldn't have to do this.
Fact is, Microsoft is worried about pulling a PSP on launch day. No matter what Sony said about it being a runaway hit from day one, all those boxes lying around Target and Walmart told a different story.
This is changing. I've heard quite a bit more about Sony audio-visual components breaking recently than customer satisfaction. All those people with PS2 CD problems can't be helping them, either.
Slashdot Mirror
How much are you worth there? Should I get my checkbook out now?
The way bases are paid for are using a new in-game currency called Prestige, which is earned in the same way that Influence/Infamy (the currencies used for heroes and villains respectively), but only while playing in supergroup mode (that is, while "flying group colors").
Prestige is an interesting concept. Unlike influence, you don't gain vastly more as you go up in level and defeat stronger foes, so even low-level group members can contribute to the total. Groups gain a bonus of 20,000 prestige for every member up to the first 15 (groups can have up to 75 members total), but groups also LOSE prestige at the same rate if they lose members so they're under 15.
Prestige gain rates is unusually slow relative to the prices of base options; reading the boards seems to indicate that earning 500-600 a mission is common. Getting your base and initial plot (containing one, tiny room with a teleporter in it) is free, but even adding the smallest of additional rooms costs 100,000 prestige! Larger lots, bigger rooms, and the devices that actually make your base into a playable area for opposing teams to attack very quickly raise costs up into the millions of prestige. Decoration items are fairly cheap, on the other hand, but most groups won't have enough room to add many of those for quite some time.
On the other hand, losing prestige is somewhat difficult. Selling base items back (in a manner that is amusingly like selling stuff out of your apartment in The Sims) returns every penny of prestige spent. Having large bases (value over 1M prestige) entails paying a monthly rent to keep everything working, but that's the only prestige cost in the game other than just buying stuff.
So, it seems clear that base development is intended to be a long-term goal for a group, which is great for a game that previously that little in the way of goals other than gaining experience, tricking out your enhancement slots, and finishing whatever mission/task force/badge collection you're working on at that moment.
I'm in the middle of playing it, and quest variety, while really still really low for starting characters, has gone up as of late. In addition to "defeat everyone" missions, there are rescue missions now, some missions that require you to protect an objective, some of the task forces have very unusual elements. (The first Terra Volta respec TF leaps to mind -- in the final area, you and your teammates have to protect a reactor against nine or ten waves of foes, but you also have to ensure the reactor doesn't go critical by using coolant on it, AND you have to keep your radiation shield charged or start taking damage rapidly.... of course the charger is some distance from the reactor itself.)
But the PvP areas seem to be a major selling point to both games, now. There are three of these areas, and they each have some major element to them that makes them different from the other areas: Siren's Call has a big "battle for the neighborhood" theme mixed in with the PvP, Warburg sends the players on elaborate collection hunts to gain use-any-time orbital missile strikes, and Bloody Bay allows heroes to attack other heroes, and villains to attack villains.
It all seems fairly cool to me, but then again I'm still a relatively new player. I don't yet know how much of all this will become old hat after a few more months of play....
Some scientists are using a kind of paddle-wand that can selectively, non-invasively, and according to them harmlessly deactivate portions of someone's brain. They're using it to run experiments in which someone's sense of sight is temporarily deactivated, to try to get information on the phenomonon of "blind-sight," a sort of rudimentary sense of the location and presence of objects not directly seen.
This is a guess of course, and other than what's in this article I know nothing about it. But I thought it was kind of weird that I should read about this, and then two weeks later someone announces a weapon that can blind someone....
I'll know it's working if it ranks me up near the top. Yeah, that'll be what decides it. If gives me any of that "below average" stuff I'll know it's utter crap.
More seriously, FINALLY, an idea concerning X-Box 360 that I actually like.
Atari 800 M.U.L.E. had the greatest theme song of all time....
(NOT the NES version though. That sucked with a great and powerful suction.)
There's only so many Star Wars games you can make.
Would you care to get me a hard number so we can begin the countdown? (KOTOR notwithstanding.)
Sure: ONE.
The original quote is obviously spoken by someone utterly fed up with making movie property games. Lucasfilm used to be known for making some absolutely brilliant things; not only did they make what are regarded by many to be the best graphical adventures, but it was also in their halls where was created what may very well have been the first true graphical virtual world.
To see them reduced to the endless milking of a pair of movie licenses, no matter how culturally significant they may be, is saddening.
Upon reading your post I went out and download the demo and played it.
The voice acting, it turns out, is quite *good*, and it's obvious that an absurd amount of time went into having characters' mouths and body language match what's said. Considering that most 3D games are content with just changing the facial texture whenever a character has to speak (Ivy's laugh in the SoulCalibur games is unintentionally freaky because of this), and I have to say, Telltale has done a great job on that.
The graphics are 3D, which is very rare for this kind of game, but works fairly well. Although they *are* a bit simplistic, they fit the style of the comic perfectly.
And I was quite impressed with the writing in what I had seen so far. So... I honestly don't see what you don't like about it, I guess.
When I was reading the article "480-Pound Woman Dies After Six Years On Couch" (second link) ...
That's the most depressing thing I've heard in months!
No, I've never been too interested in the Darwin Awards either. There is something about the death of an actual human being which I cannot laugh at. Call me a killjoy, maybe....
A game system that makes billions of dollars for its parent corporation, but has nary a game I like, is a failure from my point of view. Multiply that by millions of similarly-thinking people, and that's the world in five years.
It's possible to have a "successful" system, by your definition, that does not achieve great market penetration, which in fact DOES matter: publishers look at that to determine which systems to publish for. Hence Nintendo, who did arguably the best in profitability this generation, is in third place. Also, public reaction, not profitability, transfers over to the next-next generation's playing field.
I won't even get into the long-term effects of sponsoring quality game design and what it means for the industry as a whole to get mired into copying the same game mechanics over and over and over again... but arguably, that's an extremely important consideration.
Oh, and believe it or not, "believe it or not" is a greatly overused rebuttal phrase -- I know, because I've greatly overused it myself. But I'm recovering.
Wow, what is it with the -1 Overrated scores on these posts? Aren't there better uses for mod points than marking down an explanatory comment like this one?
I rate you +1 Awesome.
Trees have no appreciable effect on the carbon cycle. In a natural situation, trees change the balance so oxygen is favoured over carbon dioxide.
In all cases? This seems dubious, can you provide a link? At the very least, it would make for interesting reading.
Tell me about it!
God of War: More of the Same to the Utmost Degree.
Thanks. Because heaven knows we've never seen links to The Escapist here before!
(Heh, just kiddin' ya. Thanks again for Paranoia XP!)
Have you any played Final Fantasy 7 in Windows ? The game is compelling in the extreme. It has an interesting storyline, great gameplay, and still manages to look good even today (mainly because it never tried to look realistic to begin with).
Wow, I disagree with almost all those points.
However, it is also buggy. Having Direct3D acceleration on makes it to crash about once an hour (every fifteen minutes in earlier versions). This turns the game into a panicked look for the next savepoint, before the inevitable crash, and thrusts the gameplay into the background.
Zonk's review was of a game that had nowhere near this bad a problem. He actually said that he would give it a 10/10 except that he was trying to be "honest." Me, I'd say that 10/10 is the honest score, and 8/10 is second-guessing himself.
Technical problems should take a back seat, in my opinion, if the game itself is compelling enough. It seems obvious, reading your review, that it'd be more accurate if the score was a 9. Games that are works of art deserve special consideration over "frame rate hitch when three demons shoot fireballs at once" types of things.
Ocarina of Time fully deserved the 10s it got from many places, even though the game is not perfect, from a technical perspective.
Note that the act can still be brought up for a vote under normal rules and passed. The defeat was under special rules intended to speed the process.
After the hideous first passage of the Patriot Act sailed through without hardly having been read, I can't really blame the Dems for this.
If it really is what MS is trying to do, I think it's a master stroke on their part.
A master stroke? Fact is, everyone wants to be able to say their stuff is a sell-out hit. Nintendo pulled these shenanigans with copies of Mario 3 back in their "evil period." If Microsoft were confident in the 360's success, they wouldn't have to do this.
Fact is, Microsoft is worried about pulling a PSP on launch day. No matter what Sony said about it being a runaway hit from day one, all those boxes lying around Target and Walmart told a different story.
Gah, you are correct sir. My bad, serves me right for posting while in a hurry.
(people believe Sony is high quality)
This is changing. I've heard quite a bit more about Sony audio-visual components breaking recently than customer satisfaction. All those people with PS2 CD problems can't be helping them, either.
Don't some of the memory sticks (the MagicGate ones) contain hardware support for DRM?
And screw their music CDs, because they don't carry They Might Be Giants!
Umph!
Hmm... maybe we should get stickers made and pay a little visit to the local Walmart....
For now, I suppose I'll just continue on with my silent protest.
Being silent about it prolongs that against which you're protesting....