TheMightyEthan

No, it's basically right after DA2. *Edit* - More specifically, Dragon Age: Origins starts in the year 9:30, Dragon Age 2 goes from 9:30 to 9:40, and Inquisition follows the events of a book called Dragon Age: Asunder, set in 9:40.

Alright, just finished this so now I can open the spoilers. I also agree with Jack's second possibility. It just seems to fit better to me. To expand a little bit:

I also just finished The Wolf Among Us. I really liked it, though I'm not quite seeing the people who are saying it's better than TWD Season 1.

My contribution to the Dragon Age discussion: Dragon Age is slow. Slow != bad. I also agree with some of the things Strangelove has said. Some people really do complain that having health bars in Assassin's Creed breaks their immersion, and that's just silly (equally as silly as the original creator who came up with the modern frame specifically because he felt like the HUD elements needed an in-game explanation in order to not ruin the experience). I do agree that immersion is important, in the sense of suspension of disbelief, but saying really basic things like HUDs or regenerating health break your immersion is just as silly as saying film grain or cigarette burns break your immersion in film, or the fact that Elmer Fudd doesn't die when he gets shot in the face breaks your immersion when watching Looney Toons. Likewise, for me ludonarrative dissonance only becomes an issue if the game presents itself as though you have choices, but then the narrative doesn't react accordingly (which is not to say your choices have to have the "right" consequences, just that the game needs to acknowledge them). Take for instance Catherine, which I love to rant about: in gameplay you get to do all kinds of things to indicate whether you want to be with Catherine or Katherine, but no matter what you do as soon as a cutscene starts Vincent flips out about how he wants nothing to do with Catherine and only wants to be with Katherine. It's jarring. If a game doesn't want to give me choices that's fine, whatever, but don't design it so that I feel like I have choices but then as soon as my character's in a cutscene he acts in a way that's completely counter to the way I've played him to that point. But stuff like Drake being a mass murderer? Who the fuck cares? It's silly to take a work any more seriously than it takes itself (the one exception to this being if it's doing something harmful to society overall, such as reinforcing negative stereotypes or something).

Yeah, the one screen was not the Vita's problem. Honestly I think it's biggest problem was the stuff they tried to cram into it, like the rear touch sensor, that drove up the hardware price without really adding any benefit. Even the front screen doesn't really need to be touch, as convenient as it might be for menus.

I get appointed to represent kids charged with MiC (minor in consumption) all the time, although it's more frequently adults who are not yet 21 (the legal drinking age). It's similar to the disorderly conduct, it's not really all that severe a penalty but you do get arrested for it. *Edit* - @Alex: yeah, it's definitely some of both, but every single person I represent wants to explain how it's the cops' fault, they were just minding their own business, they never touched that lying bitch, and have no clue where her bruises came from, they didn't have that much to drink, they only blew a 0.012, they were perfectly capable of driving, that guy was running his mouth and deserved to get beat up, goddamn cops just need to mind their own goddamned business.

What, do they not arrest people for minor offenses over there? Like here (in my county) a disorderly conduct (being loud and disruptive in public) can get you arrested, but the typical punishment is a $100 fine, which you can get up to like 90 days to pay. It's really minor, it's just one step above a speeding ticket.

I'm sorry your ADD is causing you so much trouble.

Hunter: The Reckoning! Thank you!

$30 "like new" on Amazon. From what I've heard about this game I'll probably like it, but it's not quite good enough to justify full price. Got the Xbone version because apparently it has a more stable performance (it's locked to 30 fps, while PS4 is unlocked; I hate it when framerates fluctuate a lot).

LittleBigPlanet. Though I take no responsibility for any stabbings that occur. In general any racing game should probably work, though I don't have specific suggestions. I also remember Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance being fun, and I feel like there was another similar game on the Xbox/PS2 that was a lot of fun that involved vampires or zombies or something (I remember playing as a priest with a shotgun) but can't figure out what it is.

+1

That's not for all DLC, just the exclusive PlayStation bonus content. I'm sure it'll be small stuff, along the lines of the "60 minutes of exclusive gameplay!" Ubisoft games always have on PlayStation.

Yeah, Xbox gamers be pissed about the extra beta time for PlayStation gamers. It's silly, but at the same time I can understand some feeling of betrayal by Bungie.

I'm sure that includes arrests for minor stuff like underage drinking or disorderly conduct.

I can accept that there's an argument for the first one, but this is just false.

I kind of want to upgrade to the $100 one, bit if I do I'll lose my free shipping (my Prime expired since I ordered it).

I've been debating, and I'm going to go ahead and throw Halo 2 in here, mostly because of the ending. It's fine now, because Halo 3 exists and you can just jump right in and finish it up, but seriously this was awful when the game first launched. I remember seeing an interview with one of the developers and they were asked what they thought about people throwing their controllers down with rage over the ending, and he said something like "I don't think anyone threw their controller down with rage. They might have dropped it in awe..." I threw my controller down with rage! I remember doing it, as my roommate (who I was playing coop with) screamed "WHAT?!" We'd been all pumped for what we believed was about to be the final level of the game, where Chief returns to Earth and kicks so Covenant ass, but no, it was all a tease. The game built up but then never actually climaxed. It was so frustrating. I also have a few issues with some of the design choices, namely the addition of bosses (which thankfully they dropped in later installments) and the fact that the levels are more constrained than other games in the series tend to be. Really though these complaints take it more into "letdown" territory (it's still a good game, just not as good as 1 or 3), it's just the ending that elevates it to the level of a betrayal. Caveat: I'm talking entirely about the campaign here. I get that the multiplayer was revolutionary in terms of having that kind of experience on a console, but I'm not one who cares much for multiplayer.

If Inquisition is a letdown then I'll be done with Bioware, at least until they release a game that is well received all around. Re ME3: I loved it mechanically (ME1's systems were far from perfect, but I felt ME2 trimmed too much fat; ME3 was a good balance), and I actually really liked the plot right up until the very end, then it just goes completely off the deep end. I also don't like that they completely abandoned all the stuff they'd been foreshadowing with dark matter and whatnot. But honestly, more than the actual events of the ending I felt that it just didn't flesh things out enough, and in that respect the Director's Cut addressed basically all my issues.

I didn't notice the collectibles in ACIV being any more nefarious than previous games, other than the fact that the music sheets would run away from you so you had to chase them down, but that added to collecting them so whatever. And Freedom Cry was a pretty great DLC: it's on separate campaign, not near the size of the main game but still a decent chunk of content, and not anything that could slot into the main game in any reasonable way so you know it wasn't cut out. It's basically the equivalent of an expansion pack, but smaller. @TC: That's quite the ridiculously draconian viewpoint you have on the issue; only a Sith deals in absolutes. Don't buy games with shitty DLC, I agree, but it's silly to condemn the entire concept. *Edit* - Also, you must not have played any game that released in the last 8 years or so, if you refuse to play any game that's ever patched. And you must not have played any PC games since like 1996.

My boat shoes are $2 flipflops from Walmart.

What systems are fair game for suggestions?

Eliminating FPS's eliminates a large amount of your potential games. Really the only thing that comes to mind for me is Mario Kart.

^Everything he just said.

There's actually two of these threads. This one, for general purchases, and the Games You've Bought thread for games and consoles and whatnot. Not a big deal, just FYI.