RockyRan

That's a minimum, not a limit. Some dude over at slickdeals who says he works at BB said he's looked at the inventories of the BBs in his area and they got inventories in the range of 12-33. I might give that TV a shot but I'm certain there'll be a whole ton of maniacs camping out since 5 am on Thanksgiving day for that TV specifically. That, or the TV will be shite.

I concur. I hope the forum never dies, because when it does I will shed a single manly tear.

I just remembered that I wanted to ask about the whole quest marker thing. I hated how in Oblivion there was practically no way to do quests without quest markers because the quest log would be far too vague for you to track down, unlike in Morrowind which had no quest markers but very detailed journal entries for you to track things down. Did Bethesda make journal entries far more informative or do you still have to rely on following stupid arrows to know what to do?

That's exactly right, and it's the reason why politics in the US will continue to be little more than a pathetic joke. The very foundations that US politics root themselves in are a complete perversion of what was originally intended with the actual constitution, right down to the tit-for-tat two-party system that basically only lets people choose between Conservative and Conservative Lite. Both parties are just as equally corrupt with more similarities and differences, but someone along the way thought they'd make for a great presidential campaign if they just lambasted the opposition and everyone supporting it. These two parties are the same and yet they spend their time tearing the country in half with their idiotically misguided ideas of rallying supporters. We're getting the shit part of two opposing sides without, you know, the "opposing sides" part.

Hey Dean, how is the editor? I know Howard was hyping how it was "deep", but can you pretty much just edit the face or can you edit the body build too?

This is correct. The Let's Play I was watching had this plaguing the first 5 videos until someone pointed out to him that the 1.1 patch fixed that problem. From video 6 onwards, lo and behold, everything doesn't look like the quality of the lowest settings anymore. Does that also apply for the PC version? If so, anyone have any shots of the v1.1 PC version?

I saw the GameTrailers review and can't help but feel a bit underwhelmed. Within seconds I spotted blurry, ugly low-res textures, incredibly blocky shadows, low-poly rocks with equally low-res textures, the works. I know Todd Howard/Bethesda has a sexual fetish of overselling their games, but DAMN they definitely overdid it this time. There's still plenty of "quirks" from Oblivion in Skyrim, including "disappearing" NPCs as they move in and out of buildings, braindead enemy NPCs that act like savages (can't ever talk to them), wonky physics systems, inconsistent voice acting quality, etc. The RPS Wot I Think was woefullyuninformative. I don't know what it is about Skyrim that compels people to just gush about anecdotes they had in the game rather than, you know, informing people of what the game is like. The GT review, surprisingly, was actually more restrained in this regard. Didn't sound like they were afraid at all of pointing out all the visual/gameplay shortcomings of the game and certainly didn't spend the better half of the review just writing a glorified journal of "dear diary: Here's what I did today!" (which was a problem I've spotted pretty much everywhere on the internetz that had previews of Skyrim). There was basically no info whatsoever from RPS as to what the PC version is like, which is very disappointing considering Bethesda has been actively avoiding giving that that information and I was relying on a site like RPS to spill the beans. Looks like that ain't happening right now as it looks like Alec is still 100% in the Honeymoon Period. The GT Review definitely confirmed my decision to hold off on the game until further notice. I foresee plenty of balance issues, glitchiness, ugliness, etc. Like I said before, 60% of the reason I loved Oblivion was its moddability and shaping the game to be exactly like I want it. Vanilla Skyrim doesn't excite me nearly as much as I thought it would.

One of the many reasons why I'm holding off on Skyrim for a few weeks before getting it. I don't want to plunk down the full $60 (who the hell priced this? A console port at $60? LOL) for god knows what. They haven't shown ANYTHING regarding the PC version and I'm not in the mood for "unpleasant surprises". The potential issues are very high. There could be low res textures, bad pop-up with low draw distance, low FOV, shitty mouse acceleration, graphics card issues, unstable builds requiring immediate patching, said patching causing game save corruption, shitty console UI with hilariously oversized fonts and buttons. And who knows? Maybe the game just isn't good. This could be the one ES that's just too streamlined for the lowest common denominator. Let's face it, that's the road they've been taken and I'm just waiting for Bethesda to break the camel's back in that regard. I'm probably being cynical, but even if none of the above are present in the game I still love Oblivion mostly for the mods, and the modding tools won't be available at launch IIRC, meaning anything that nags me in the vanilla game will nag me even more because I know there'd be a mod to fix it if the tools were there or if enough time had passed for some modder to do it. ES games are one of the rare "wine" games that simply get better with age. I'm in absolutely no hurry to buy a Bethesda game at launch, especially with how often they love to leave some nice bugs/balance issues in the games at that time.

I've spent about $360. Not bad, but damn these <$5 deals rack up quickly >_<

Saw the trailer. The verdict's still out for me. I can't comment on the graphics because I'm on my netbook at the moment which absolutely cannot handle high-quality video, so I had to settle for blurry SD which caused all detail to be pretty much lost. Gameplay wise, I like that they're moving back to the multi-city (or at least a countryside) set-up, but other than that I have absolutely no idea if I'd like this. There's still no information on how interactive the city is (I found GTA IV to actually lack interaction between the player and the city. There was only ever interaction between people or cars, but never the city itself). Rockstar, IMO, should start moving toward making the city more detailed. Be able to go into more buildings, be able to do certain things to affect how cities work. Let's say they bring back turf wars, for instance. I'd want the territories controlled by specific gangs to change, like if a highly-violent, slummy gang takes over then you see burned cars along the sidwalk, peeling paint on the buildings, barred windows and the sounds of gunshots. If one a sleazy high-priced drug dealing mafia takes over you see bright lights, swinging lifestyles, crack dealers at every corner and outrageously expensive cars being moved. That's the kind of environment they need to be moving into. Plus, the missions themselves need to have a far better structure. I found GTA IV overall to be one of those "first game on new hardware" deals, where it's essentially an updated version of a last-generation game. Visually the textures are nicer, animations are better, etc., but the city is just as lifeless and static as San Andreas. I've been playing San Andreas and I'm shocked at how little GTA IV actually progressed past it. They both feel very equal and GTA IV doesn't at all feel like it's the "next generation" of GTA. I really do hope GTA V does that.

Like I said, there are a variety of videos of people essentially rambling during the protests about what they should do, what the problems are, and how to fix them. People aren't going to shout this same thing for 8 minutes in unison while marching down some street. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-KA3ZTD6V4 Remember that the media isn't reporting on these kinds of things. If you can take the time to dig a little deeper you can see people with an idea. IMO, the protest in general and its direction is pretty much clear. Are you trying to say every single protester should have his/her own 8 minute ramble with his/her own unique ideas? Because that's not how protests generally work. They're ideas by mob. Go ask protesters during the 60s and many of them said pretty much the same thing but it's really not "parroting", they just all agreed on the same issue.

I don't think Kotaku divulged where McWhertor was off to (though I might be wrong). Today's episode of Invisible Walls over at GameTrailers introduced him as their newest member of the staff. Not to say that GT is the pinnacle of the video game journalism industry, but I think it's fair to say he left for greener pastures, don't you guys think?

Watched the GTTV thing. Two things I noticed. Aonuma said that Zelda has a single timeline. No fucking clue how TP especially fits into it if that's the case. That music in the background when they were previewing/talking about Skyward Sword. Is that from the actual game? Because if so, thumbs up. Definitely a step up from the MIDI crap of TP.

I know Kotaku loves the "IT'Z A BLOG GUYZ" card whenever they post shit like this, but I do hope they realize that re-posting random shit from forums qualifies as neither good blog material OR good news.

A big factor in these protests is the fact that they're protesting against a deep, complex issue. It's simply too complex for people to simply shout "give us more civil rights!" or "stop taxing without representing us!" These protests are created as a result of over a decade long of unhappiness stemmed from the nation's largest corporations essentially taking over the nation, the government, and many people's day to day lives. People are mistaking "This is a complex issue" with "they're just complaining". Make no mistake, it's a complex issue, but listening to the (sane) protesters carefully can give you a good general idea of where they stand (and many people have actually said what they think should be done). And again, protests are not inherently about providing solutions. They're about civil disobedience and shouting there's a problem.

I think the idea is pretty clear, at least from where I'm standing. What bothers me more are the crazies going out yelling for (and getting) all the attention, which makes the media focus on that because the media loves crazies and controversy, which makes people get the wrong idea. Several myths include the fact that it's ONLY hippies and 20-something hipsters sipping lattes and singing Kumbaya. There's people of all kinds, sizes, races, genders, backgrounds, and socioeconomic statuses protesting, but again, the media only focuses on the hippies and the crazies so everyone around the world who doesn't know any better thinks that way too. There's also the myth that they're being violent or "disturbing the peace". I don't know much about the other Occupy movements, but the one in NYC has been fairly peaceful (save for the early days with the march on the Brooklyn bridge, etc.) and clean up after themselves as best they can. The biggest problem over there in terms of "inconvenience" is that there's nowhere for the protesters to relieve themselves because the nearby stores have banned them all and the city refuses to supply porta potties. You can imagine what happens next. Then there's the myth that it's a completely idea-less movement with people just shouting "boo". That was just a tactic that the media used to try and dismiss the protest in the early days, but now even they largely have admitted that there's a clear message. It's generally a lot of misinformation and cloudy facts being sprinkled out that obfuscates the reality of the protests, but it's actually clear and not anywhere near as disorganized or meaningless as some people believe. Some people out there think they shouldn't be doing this because "it makes no difference". I don't actually know of any single protest that directly makes a difference. From the Greensboro Sit Ins to the original Tea Party incident (the colonial era one, not the bullshit they have today), protests are inherently unable to do anything directly. Imagine if other people would go to that diner and tell the black kids that they're stupid because "sitting in a diner isn't going to magically make the president sign civil rights reforms", or if other citizens would go to the Tea Partiers and say that they're just being loudmouthed derelicts with nothing better to do than dress than indians and destroy personal property for no reason.Protests are never about handing the Prez a binder with a well-organized step-by-step dissertation of exactly how to fix what they want him to fix complete with a table of contents and an appendix with footnotes. They're always about unhappy mobs practicing civil disobedience who are saying "This is wrong. I strongly do not agree". Protests are never supposed to be the solution, they're the building blocks to the change the protesters want to see. In the case of Syria, the protests led to a bloody and aggressive coup, and in the case of the 1960s in the United States it was a massive movement consisting of hundreds if not thousands of incidents and protests as people put pressure on the rest of the nation and its leaders to change civil rights. Saying "there's no point because protesting makes no difference" or "I don't see them presenting a solution" blatantly misses the forest for the trees.

I've never liked "rating" systems for comments. Discourages people from giving a dissenting opinion because a bunch of simple-minded halfwits go "UG NO LIKE. UG THUMB DOWN" on the "unpopular" opinion. Useful for erasing blatant trolls, aggravating for everything else. Lets fanboys, etc., come out of the woodwork to "disagree" without actually saying anything. I've been of the idea that if people have something to say, they should make a post and say it, not just press a "UG LIKE" or "UG NO LIKE" without any back up and just move on.

New features in GTA V include obligatory defecation minigames, consisting of 3-minute-long simon-says minigames every 8 in-game hours as you force massive dookies into the toilet of your choice, as well as adrenaline-pumping traffic features like contesting bogus traffic tickets and putting gas in your car! Also, an all-new feature for GTA: grocery shopping! Feel the thrill of pushing a light cart across one of 150 meticulously rendered supermarkets, gas stations, and produce markets for a variety of different products and produce! Each item on the cart will have its own physics system so you can gawk at the hyper-advanced object physics as you put items on the cashier's conveyor belt with haunting realism! You say it's boring? Who cares! ATMOSPHERE! SO REAL! And that's not all, all new features have been added to the beloved cell phone from GTA IV. Now it's a SMART phone, and many heart-stoppingly awesome missions will include texting sequences where you must control each of your characters' thumbs individually with the left and right thumbsticks. Clicking each thumbstick will tap on the virtual keyboard of the smart phone, providing an unparalleled texting experience that no other game provides! Also included is a new "billing" feature, where you get overcharges on your cell phone bill and you must call customer service and wait for 20 real-time minutes as a satire of all the times you actually have to call in real life! --- Isn't it strange how earlier GTAs made fun of exactly the shit they had you do in GTA IV? If Rockstar was trying to be ironic with all the boringass shit in that game, I sure ain't laughing. In other news, I've been playing San Andreas for the first time and I was surprised that I was actually having fun. And here I was thinking maybe the GTA series wasn't for me after trying GTA IV as my first game in the series

I totally get where you're coming from, Wheats. I understand Nintendo's never been really about "player choice" or anything even close to open world gameplay, but I just keep getting that feeling on practically every first party game that I've done this before. It wouldn't really matter if we're talking about games like the Assassin's Creed series, which has only been around since 2007, but when these series have been going on for as long as they do it just gets tiring. I'd love Nintendo to come up with a new IP with every intention of making it part of the "classic" line-up that they have and just pour all their effort into it. I want them to start fresh and design something from the ground up with contemporary technology in mind. I feel that basically everything they do at this point is stuff they have done before, adapted for their current hardware. I feel like they're limiting themselves to pumping out sequels for something they invented 15 years ago, and despite the incremental changes with every iteration it still doesn't beat the freshness of a completely new IP from the brain of some of the best people in the industry. I know they can do better. I'm just frustrated that they're not, even though they know they can.

No, you're exactly spot on. You articulated my thoughts better than I could, actually. It's a bit creepy Sure. I know you didn't subscribe to what you just said, so I think it's fair to post what you do believe

So then you must hate Uncharted 2 then yeah? What was different there? The story and setting were different yeah, but it was basically the same in terms of gameplay to Uncharted 1. And a game has to feel different to be a good sequel?.....Mario Galaxy felt the same as Sunshine? Point out what sequels you are talking about then. "The difference between DSi XL and 3DS?" So you can't see the difference. Besides knowing the difference yourself, you ignore it. Why? I don't know about Uncharted 2. I haven't played it yet. "Hate" is a strong word for same-y sequels. I've played plenty that I don't hate, but I think they're all "meh" at best and have never really been blown away by any of them. At any rate, I'm not really anticipating being blown away by Uncharted 2 either, with the range of "meh" depending on how many things it actively recycles. Other than that I don't really know much about that game. Games that feel different to be good sequels? I can give you plenty. I felt BK: Nuts & Bolts was amazing given the sheer innovation it sported. People whined and bitched it was "too different", I absolutely loved it for being different. Assassin's Creed 2 is another worthy sequel that truly improves the core mechanics in a very meaningful way, even if it did recycle the combat system without adding anything truly meaningful in that regard. The jump from Half Life 1 to Half Life 2 was amazing as well, and even if I didn't like Portal 2 as much as Portal 1 it was definitely neater. Mario Galaxy is definitely a worthy sequel. SMG2, on the other hand, was definitely a cash-in. Note I said "nearly everything", not truly "everything". SMG was definitely one of the exceptions, even if I personally enjoyed Mario Sunshine more because I like exploration-based platformers better. I don't think I ever said I "can't see the difference". I know what the difference is. That's not what I'm talking about, and I have a feeling you know exactly what point I'm trying to make