actually, i should probably say stats/class stuff as opposed to RPG.
i like setting up characters and builds. :) 

Willem, we have < q > </ q > tags, would be awesome if you could use them. Searching for the closing " when skimming over posts sucks. 

If this board used standard tags, I might care. As it is, if I can't remember what to use I don't. :) 

would <span class="quote"></span> be standard enough for you? 

If that's what you believe the standard for message boards is ... sure. 

BBCode some sort of standard.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBCode 

some sort of standard 

Note, I am not using the nerd sense of the word "standard". I'm using it more in the "what most people are used to" sense.

But yes, mirroring BBCode would make the codes more likely to get used.

Also, adding buttons to insert them would help as well.

But this really has nothing to do with PC Games, so... 

 

I'm not surprised Mass Effect's combat is getting a bad rap on a Quake board - it's doing things that are quite the opposite to what a hardcore Quake player would find interesting (I'm generalising, but I've heard so many people on this board share the same views about cover-based combat, that I think it's a fair generalisation).

Personally I really liked (nearly loved) Mass Effect 1, as I got an very atmospheric and engrossing space opera. I enjoyed the combat, but I enjoy a very wide range of combat mechanics, so I'm quite easily pleased. Haven't played 2 or 3 yet. 

I like cover mechanics when they're done well... 

is not an rpg at all. i think of it as an action game with lots of dialogue. but the mechanics are a lot like, say the batman games. you get xp, buy points for that skill you like and move on.

dragon age on the other hand, thats an rpg. the first on i mean, haven't played the second one. and while it is linear like mass effect, i really think it was done in a much, much better way.

but i love the mass effect games. i love the atmosphere and the looks of it, funky sci-fi stuff and even cyberpunk sometimes. but i agree, the games are linear and the combat is very simple, cover based stuff. i wish there was more exploration, but strangely i don't mind the linearity of it.

even choices are not really an issue because its something that just happens. i wish it was more like, say the witcher, which i think its the only game that does choices really well.

haven't played the third yet. will wait for a price drop. not enough $$ to buy new games these days.

somehow i feel this post is useless, but i'm posting it anyway. :) 

I was just having a poop when I realised that naming argument about Rage was full of shit. Remember those movies with the Empire and the Rebellion? 

I'm not sure about the Rage argument (I haven't seen it in context), but in general names are super important and will always influence your perception of things. (The degree to which it does, and your awareness of it, will differ between people and scenarios, but it will always colour your perception and there is nothing you can do about it).

If it doesn't matter, why not just name everything in a generic and functional fashion? Who cares, right? Might as well call your items weapon1, weapon2, weapon3, etc. How about your skills? You've unlocked ability 1! Wow. Can't wait till I get ability 4! You were slain by melee1. Oh no. You picked up 5 units of ammo for weapon 6. Yeah!

Gonna go rock the house in coop with RemoteClient4! FUCK YEAH! 

'You picked up four 5.56m Jacketed Hollow Point rounds for your M24A SOCOM X-4F Elite ranger 4.4344443434 27n gunwank carbine.'

No the names do matter, but they aren't the big deal being made of them. If the Authority had been introduced properly, had some proper backstory and a build up of threat it would have been a sore point but easily forgotten. The fact they weren't means that the name now stands out, because it's the ONLY thing we know about them.

Half-Life 2 and the Combine had a mystery about it that was interesting, and you encountered a lot of their activities, so the boring name didn't mean anything because it was drowned out by the other stuff.

Given the same company gave us the 'Strogg', I'm not sure I care about basic names in games. At least it allows us to avoid having to read about the shimbogs and their leader flobblewobble's involvement in the yuktuk wars of timblemin-minor against the savage tribe rrr-thuk-rgggrg. Because that's the shit we'd end up with. 

The Combine is actually a good name. A combine, used in farming, is a great metaphor for what they did to Earth. Someone put some thought into that and it works.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combine_harvester

Also, there's the aliens and humans working together in combination angle. 

Quick Mercenaries 2 review. Bit of a shit game, 5/10. I was expecting a short, cool, fps. Got an open world, third person RPG/shooter reminiscent of Saints Row 2, only worse.

http://www.etherealhell.com/etherealhell/reviews/2012/mercenaries2.php 

some old propaganda and propaganda posters referred to nazi forces as a giant combine tearing up the earth, if I recall correctly. Art depicted a giant combine with a swastika instead of the rotating blades churning up the countryside. 

Thanks to Spirit, the DICK, I'm kind of replaying it again (the "portable" version). So great. People usually credit SS2, but the first one has more atmosphere imo. Maybe because of the low res textures and sprites. Quite nonlinear and explorative gameplay, even secret doors and areas. And with the pistols you can even rapid-fire like in HL if your trigger/mousefinger allows it. Just cleared the medical deck - didn't remember there were so many reinforcement mutants.

The standard controls take some getting used to, but it can (and should) be set to play like Doom. Spirit: I found out that E enables mouselook. It's a good idea to check out the reference card, although some standard key are remapped in the WASD config. 

Even in this day and age. 

that's what you get for not liking deus ex.

thanks! 

crosspostin' from rub2 thread.

Than said: By the way, this is perhaps warrant for discussion in itself, but are there any modern games that have this kind of level design (or design similar to typical Quake maps)? I can't think of a single game, but I haven't played that many recently; SS3, Duke, Bulletstorm and Rage are about the only shooters I played recently, and none of them had particularly interesting level layouts or vertical maps. Level design seems really dumbed down these days, or has very different objectives at least.

It's a shame but I think the sad truth of the matter is that the majority of the games-buying public nowadays have the attention spans of gnats (can't really say that in a way that doesn't sound snobbish - I appreciate there are a lot of nice people who play games who simply have limited time and just want some quick, easy, turn-your-brain-off action), and the more opportunities you give the player to be off the beaten track, the more likely it is they get lost, confused or whatever - even if only briefly - but it makes them respond less favourably to the game.

Back in the "good old days", gamers I think were a hell of a lot geekier and more patient and more interested in exploring sadistic maze-like levels. These gamers are still around of course; they're us! But sadly us wrinkly grey old farts now make up only a small fraction of the market base, and it's no longer financially viable to make games for us any more.

(normal Kinn disclaimers apply; the above is likely to contain random splatterings of bullshit/hyperbole which you may ignore as appropriate/to taste). 

Got to disagree, a lot of old games were badly designed and there were not that many to choose from. So we all endured the repetitive nature of 'old' game design. Fighting awkward control scheme's, obtuse UI layouts and getting lost because the designers believed in mind reading are not reasons to celebrate, but simply rose tinted glasses of a time when we were young and did not know otherwise.

Not all new games are shallow in depth or detail and there are plenty to find but everyone man and his dog is making games nowadays and finding stuff is a lot harder. Games nowadays are easier to pick up and play and cater towards certain groups of people better. I am sure there will be some weird backlash to current game design eventually and we will go retro again! :) 

was more about why I think games such as shooters have gone largely from non-linear to linear, rather than from badly-designed to well-designed.

I fully agree that a lot of old games had terrible level design, and even I avoided them. I couldn't stomach more than I think 2 levels of Hexen II, for example. 

Was terrible. Simply awful level design imho.