TheMightyEthan

Naww, it's still gonna be good, just different, I've got the faith! Yeah, to be fairer I probably should have said "everything that I liked about it" rather than "everything that made it good." It may still be a good game, but it won't really feel like a Dragon Age game. Yeah, it didn't make me cry, but I did feel compelled to do even the things that I knew were futile.

Length is on the chopping block because they always charge $60, and people want to be sure they're getting their money's worth. What RockyRyan is saying is that more games should be smaller, but also cost less. Also, he explicitly says that not every game needs to be smaller, but just that by the same token not every game needs to be enormous.

I would like to contribute, but I think you basically covered it. Just pretend I quoted you and then added "This."

Too bad they destroyed everything that made it good in the sequel.

It just felt really off to me, but I can't really articulate how. I tried it on both PC and 360, got the same feeling on both.

They could stand to refine the combat a little, but I wouldn't want them to make it any more prominent than it was in the first one. Trouble is, if they refine it, then they're going to want to make it more prominent to show off their improvements. I would rather they leave the combat the same and make it something you should generally avoid than improve it and give it more prominence. I agree with this wholeheartedly.

Yeah, I bought Darksiders for $45 and was happy with it, but I probably would have regretted it if I'd spent any more.

We're starting to see more of the kind of "middle class" games at more appropriate price levels through the DD services (XBL, PSN, Steam, etc). I think we'll continue to see quality increase in games designed with those types of services in mind.

The inability to access the load menu during cutscenes in games that let you make choices that affect the outcome. "No! Shit! That's the wrong option! Now I have to wait through 15 minutes of cutscenes before I can load my save and redo the convo..."

But I've played the first one to death, have all the levels completely memorized. I would love it for them to keep the actual gameplay exactly the same (with some tweaks to the context-sensitive stuff like dean said) and just have a new plot, new environments, etc.

Are you kidding? Bioshock has some of the worst shooting I've experienced since the N64 era. I fucking loved the atmosphere and everything, but I just can't subject myself to that shooting long enough to actually get anywhere in the game.

It would be hard not to trump the first one in gameplay.

I actually feel the complete opposite about this. Normally, I'll buy a game on day one, buy the extra content when it releases and then the GotY edition is released and someone gets all of that for less than I paid for the game. As gamers we constantly get shafted for being early adopters, we pay the most for hardware and software, and usually get buggy unfinished products for our trouble, while late adopters come along and pick up the newer, slimmer, faster, better version at a lower price. Pre-Order DLC Redresses that balance. The people who are loyal to a product, who want to gamble on it being good get a nice bonus. The ones who wait and see have to pay for the extras. Also, Pre-Orders are hugely important to publishers as it is what retailers base their orders on. A massive pre-order number can mean the difference between missing your target, and smashing it into tiny little pieces. I understand the reasons for it, but surely you can understand that I'm not going to pay $60 to preorder something when I will then have to shell out even more money to get the same content that people who preordered it a month ago get for free. Similarly I won't buy a game that had pre-order DLC after its release unless the price has dropped enough that I'm not paying more for it plus the DLC. And I do frequently preorder games. So for instance with DA2, I'll probably buy it eventually, but likely not until an Ultimate Edition comes out with all the DLC included. I understand why publishers want to encourage preorders, but I wonder to what extent those tactics hurt post-release sales. I can't be the only one who, having missed the opportunity to get certain content included with the main game, will decide to hold off getting the game altogether until I can get that content without paying more than the original game price.

I've got a G500 and so far I love it, though I've only had it for a few months.

I admit that I do this in texting in situations where no more than an acknowledgement is required (i.e. I receive a message that says "The movie is at 9"), because I feel like it's rude to not respond at all.

I also have had good experience with Logitech accessories.

The pre-order DLC in Dragon Age 2 is actually one of the reasons I'm not buying the game. Not the only reason, however. But I won't buy it because I feel like they're punishing me for being unsure about their changes to the game mechanics and not deciding 15 years ago that I was going to purchase it. Once I played the demo my fears about the combat were (somewhat) allayed, and I would have considered pre-ordering it at that point except by that time the pre-order DLC was no longer available and so I'll be damned if I'm going to shell out the full price and get less content than others who are paying the same amount.

Before the demo/beta was planned, someone at Crytek was like "man, we are totally screwing our PC cusomters... I KNOW! I'll leak a dev version so they can see how much we're screwing them over so they'll know not to waste their money!"

I don't think there's anything in here that you don't find out within like the first 10 minutes of the game... Other than inside spoiler tags, I mean.

lol, I figured it would be obvious, since I was acting like I was under the impression that pirates just magically osmose content onto the internet. Back to my question though: are we doing the steam event?

I dunno, it's not so much that he's tricked as that he's desperate, and willing to do whatever is necessary to save the woman he loves. That, combined with the fact that at first glance the colossi are just giant monsters (and who, especially a gamer, would object to someone killing giant monsters?), leads to this situation.

I agree, as long as the main game is worth the cost, and the DLC is worth its own cost, then I don't care at all. People like to complain about the Mass Effect 2 DLC (specifically the DLC characters), but what I got on the disc felt like a full game to me, so I was happy. It also matters to me how it was developed. If it was developed as part of the game and then removed then I'm less okay with that, but if it was developed separately as an add-on then that's fine. Of course most of the time we're never going to know for sure how it was developed. On-disc DLC is tougher, but just because it feels more like removed content than added content even though I know it doesn't really change the nature of it.

I meant arguable that Wander is bad. The colossi are obviously the victims no matter what.

Yeah, I got what you meant, I was sarcastically mocking those who pretend like it's the people downloading it who put it up to begin with.

Let the hype train roll! Leaflet inside the Dragon Age 2 box (from ): *Edit* - The assumption is that this is talking about the Arrival DLC, though there's a small chance it's actually just for ME3.