MasterDex

I've played tournaments where money was on the line. I was never paid a wage or a salary but I did have to work my ass off. I can't imagine being paid a wage changes the styles of gameplay that are dominant in competitive gaming. Anyway, the ultimate point I was making is that getting a killstreak in a pub can often feel more rewarding than beating some team in a competitive game and it's often harder to obtain.

I hate to be a horrendous dick, but huge pet peeve of mine: getting a kill streak on a public match in a first person shooter is not the same as playing on a pro level. >_> Because if you're playing at a pro level, you're too busy camping and following the same routine for each particular map as you have done all previous matches because your clan leader thinks that's how it should be done and everyone else is doing the same. Sorry, pet peeve of mine. I've done the pro-gaming thing and it sucked. So much more fun playing pubs.

I disagree. I had the improved jacked and Aerondight from the first game and found them invaluable in the beginning yet not overpowered. I don't think I actually got rid of Aerondight until halfway through Chapter 2.

I don't know if you can say nobody is harmed. The used market these days is different to how it was a few years ago. Gamestop undercuts publishers and developers on Day 2. When console games rely so much on front-loaded sales, they're losing profits to Gamestop and when the figures come in, those lost profits could make the difference between a greenlit sequel or an IP locked away in limbo. How do Gamestop's practices differ now from those a few years ago? I don't know about anywhere else other than my own region but before Gamestop came in, used games weren't available for sale on Day 2. It would usually be a month or two after release before you'd come across a second-hand game. When Gamestop came, they started undercutting the devs and publishers on day 2 by 10% and that's where they made so much money. They were the first that I saw that aggressively encourage trade-ins and used sales - offering more for trade-ins of brand new games.

I don't know if you can say nobody is harmed. The used market these days is different to how it was a few years ago. Gamestop undercuts publishers and developers on Day 2. When console games rely so much on front-loaded sales, they're losing profits to Gamestop and when the figures come in, those lost profits could make the difference between a greenlit sequel or an IP locked away in limbo.

Sadly, I didn't have that privilege.

I suppose welcome back is in order then! Are you planning on getting BF3 on PC? A battalion shooting team member could make a nice team-mate. Anyway, welcome back! Same place, different name...pretty much.

Ok, going all Asian Cinema and erotic here. It's Hong Kong Cinema at its comedy best - Sex and Zen. It's a raunchy, nudity and sex-filled, hilarious yet serious tale that I find hard to even describe in words. It's a remake of a '90s film of the same name but whatever about that, this one was brilliant. The best I can come up with to describe it is: "Remember Hot Shots? Yeah, like that but with the Asian twist." Oh yeah and it features the beautiful Saori Hara too... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycqk16UrYWI

Ea have been pretty fair in that regard in the past though. I've been using the same username since BF2 and as long as the fuckers allow me to use the same name (MasterDex) I'll be happy enough. PS. If any of you fuckers prevent me from getting that name for BF3, I will hunt ye down and wear ye're skin for a dress!

Is an evil pink pony.

I agree with DukeOfPwn, I think this is entirely fair. Over on Kotaku, people are exclaiming punishment and so on but it really isn't. It's an incentive for people to buy new, it's added content for new buyers. I've seen the car analogy quite a bit used in offence against this but it doesn't work at all. The car industry is the whole time offering incentives for new buyers. When Gamestop is undercutting developers and publishers on day 2, that's a big problem and it was only a matter of time before the industry said "hold on a second!". If you're unwilling to pay an extra fiver at retail, I say screw ya. If you know you're not supporting the developers or publishers by saving a measly fiver then you deserve to be missing some content and if you buy the game later, when it's on sale for cheap second-hand then paying for that extra content on top of it shouldn't be an issue. It's not a punishment for used-game buyers, it's a reward for new game buyers. All that said, it's a thin line between a fair incentive and an unfair money-grab but in this case, I think id are firmly on the side of fair.

I'm not happy about the need to have Origin installed and I've heard some disconcerting things from people about BF3 but my love for the series is too great to avoid it so I know I'm gonna give in to it.

Definitely looks better...that said, they all still have a touch of the fuglies to some degree.

Well said, RockyRan. Just as an aside, What are you're opinions on the domino effect that the success of Origin could bring about, i.e. Ubisoft, Activision, et al, doing the same thing?

Quote of the day.

There's a difference between using a created word like Hobbit and using a common word like Scrolls, surely you can see that? Also, Orcs and Wargs weren't created by Tolkien so they were just frivolous claims. You're saying there are far too many similarities but you haven't really went into what they are apart from the fact that they're both set in fantasy worlds and the titles both contain the word Scrolls A bit more creative? Being backed into a corner and told "You can't use this common word, this common word, this common word, etc, etc, ad infinitum" doesn't promote creativity, it stifles it. It limits what you can call your game out of fear of being sued. That's not a good thing at all.

I'm not disagreeing but add on the Diablo III playercount? Are Blizzard doing the opposite of what most do and overestimating the load? What about 10 years from now? I don't like to place my faith in things like this. I don't want to ever be locked out from using a product I've purchased because the ones who made it feel it isn't worth their time or money. Take Baldur's Gate for example. Imagine if anyone who bought the games now was locked out from enjoying the game because Bioware had demanded an always-on connection. I know that's even more absurd back then than it is now what with a lot of the world still being on 56k modems but it's still a bit silly to demand something like this for a game that many still view as a singleplayer game and would like to play it that way. There are just too many variables for me to feel comfortable paying for a game that demands an internet connection even though I'll be playing solo.

The original Gundam is worth checking out but be warned, you may end up falling into a spiral and before you know it, will have watched all Gundam series thus far. Legend of Galactic Heroes is completely awesome. RahXephon is very like Neon Genesis but quite good so it's worth checking out. Eureka Seven is also worth checking out for Neon Genesis-likes. I could keep going but I'll leave the selection small for now.

FDS, you keep on bringing up how Blizzard don't have to appeal to every market but you haven't addressed my statement that they're not even addressing the entirety of their core market. You're also equating every person who complains and says they won't buy the game with all the people that buy the game. Sure, if we were to visualise things, we'd have a venn diagram but there's not complete overlap there. Some of us won't be buying Diablo III because of this. Also, it's not just about whether you can get internet or not, it's also about whether you have stable net or not and whether the servers are stable or not. Sure, Bnet 2.0 has had very few outages but add the people that will be playing Diablo III on top of that and you're going to increase the chances of server overloads. One of the biggest reasons I'm against things like this is because it presents a slippery slope. Already, we see id's Tim Willits coming out applauding the "always-on" connection and how long more before every game, single-player or not, requires you to be online? If none of this bothers you, fine but don't belittle the opinion of others just because you disagree with it.

That's kind of like saying, "Yes, there's some similarities to Dungeon & Dragons and Lord of the Rings, like halflings, dwarves, elves, and orcs, but that's about it." Well yeah, when it comes down to it. Sure, you could mention some other similarities but they're essentially cut from the same cloth...well, one helped stitch the cloth but you get what I mean. You said: I'm saying that it won't be confused with the super-popular (known better by their subtitles) The Elder Scrolls because there's only a narrative/background genre tying the two together, unless...Is Skyrim going to be a card game? If Bethesda succeeds with getting the Scrolls name changed then it opens up the industry to a whole load of frivolous suits that are just going to be bad for developers, not to mention the chain that will be woven tightly around the necks of developers as they think of a title for their game.

I think the comparison to Edge Games is somewhat relevant because when it boils down to it, both cases are about the ability to trademark a single, common word. I think that's crazy. Yes we can say that there is some similarity between TES and Scrolls in that they're both based on Fantasy and have the word scrolls in their title but that's about it.

I wish I was! But no Just Baldur's Gate for now.

=IBF2=MasterDex[PXOD] http://steamcommunity.com/id/MasterDex

But I'm playing Baldur's Gate again so I prefer that one!

I'm fine with genre blending so long as it works well but from my experience, most games that blend multiple genres aren't fantastically conceived. They're more like jacks-of-all rather than masters at anything, which can be fine but personally I'd rather drink a fine whiskey than a JD and coke....Actually, scrap that analogy. I've a better one. Developing a multi-genre game is like creating a multi-class character in Baldur's Gate. It sounds like an awesome idea - "I can be a fighter, a thief and a mage?!" but unless you're very experienced, it ends up being unbalanced and you realise you should have just made a fighter instead, or at least just dual-class it.