Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Sig-ma

Members
  • Content count

    145
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Sig-ma

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  1. Sig-ma

    Diablo 3

    Technically, no-- they weren't. The documentary that came with the Collector's Edition spoke about how members of Blizzard North had started work on Diablo 3 before Lord of Destruction was even out (which would make Diablo 3's development time roughly 11-12 years). However, work halted and new iterations had to be created following Blizzard North falling apart. That isn't really the point anyway. What I was attempting to say is that for a company that prides itself as being one of the few remaining developers that refuses to release a game "until it's done," Diablo 3 exists as a direct contradiction to that. It launched without PvP, the real money AH was taken down, server issues, game breaking bugs and so on. Even if you narrow down the development time to a solid four years of consistent work, it still feels rushed, especially in Act IV, so it doesn't really matter.
  2. Sig-ma

    Diablo 3

    Diablo 3 is fun and for that reason alone, I do like it. However, the question I asked myself after beating it on normal is if I believed it was (or would) be better than Torchlight, Torchlight II, Path of Exile and Grim Dawn combined, since you can buy all four of those for the same as a copy of Diablo 3 costs at the moment. Of course, the answer is "probably not," despite three of those games not being out yet. The story is awful (and isn't coherent with the prior Diablo games), the DRM sucks, I have no idea why Blizzard allowed bidding in the AH considering after the bidding time expires, you'll likely have found an upgrade over the item you bidded on, MP is utterly pointless until you hit the harder difficulties (and even then, the benefit is debatable), the game is really short, so forth and so on. Despite taking 12 years, the game kind of feels poorly thought out and dare I say even rushed...
  3. The problem I have with that is the TMNT were never aliens. True, the mutagen had alien properties and one of the main villians was an alien (Krang) but... I had been hopeful it would be awesome, even a bit dark, but with Michael Bay attached to it, I doubt that will be the case. It will likely be yet another crappy TMNT movie featuring Zak Neutrino flying around in his space cadillac, half of the movie budget being spent on the Tetrodome exploding, Splinter dying (by explosion) and as a general rule, the characters having less depth than the many explosions that happen throughout the film. EDIT: Actually, now that I think about it, TMNT was always really heavy on the explosions. I remember Baxter Stockman, Beebop and Rocksteady all exploding when defeated in the game Turtles In Time (which was an awesome game), so who knows...
  4. I liked the first TMNT movie. As a matter of fact, I watched it rather recently with my wife and I still like it. The first movie is rather dark (at least, for a kid's movie). I also liked the early cartoons and first few NES games but ever since, everything has been rather poor. This Michael Bay version sounds like it has potential to be the worst of all.
  5. Sig-ma

    Diablo III Launching May 15

    From what I heard from my friend who was in the beta, he said you could invite people from your Real ID friend-list to play coop with you. He didn't say anything about private servers. Your coop and SP campaigns are considered private instances but still use the main servers. Later on (or at harder difficulties) it becomes less and less feasible to solo the campaign, so you're provided NPC companions to assist you if you don't want to play with friends or other people. They're probably not great, of course, so ideally you play with other people. I believe you can drop in and out of a coop game at will however by simply inviting a friend to your instance via Real ID. He picked up the pre-sale via Diablo 3's website on Battle.net. It downloads the data early so you're ready to play the moment the servers flip online. They still are releasing the game via physical media as well. Supposedly there is also a Collector's Edition but it isn't available from many places. It includes a Diablo skull, USB drive, soundtrack, art book and some special in-game items for Diablo 3, WoW and SC2 (like vanity pets or icons).
  6. Sig-ma

    Diablo III Launching May 15

    No. However, Blizzard implemented an auction house where people can buy and sell items with gold or with real currency. The currency system basically works like Microsoft points, you can purchase points or if an item you auctioned sells, you're rewarding points. These points cannot be redeemed for real money but can be used to purchase stuff in Diablo 3, SC2 or WoW. D3 features server-side drop-rates (like WoW), so really nice items will be very rare. Furthermore, the class skills are almost all based on weapon damage, so your equipment will largely dictate how effective you are (since there is little in terms of customization beyond runes for specific abilities). There is no LAN support or anything like that and it requires a constant internet connection even for SP, so you're basically coerced as much as humanly possible to use the auction house. I'm not sure how well it will work. I can already see many people becoming pissed because their hardcore characters died due to them being disconnected mid-battle (which happens all of the time in WoW), because of a forced online system that rewards players who dump money into it more than those who invest time into it.
  7. Sig-ma

    Diablo III Launching May 15

    I'm not really sure what you mean. I'm sure every "build" will be viable on normal but on harder difficulties (or PvP, especially) I'm sure there will still be cookie-cutter spec's. The main difference is, since so many abilities are based solely on weapon damage, gear will be arguably be more important than any talent choices you make. In addition, since drops will be calculated server-side rather than per player instance, many players will likely be forced to use the auction house to even do well at the more difficult skill levels. Anyone can see Blizzard designed the talent system specifically with the auction house in mind.
  8. Sig-ma

    Diablo III Launching May 15

    I'm not really sure what to think of D3. I've been following it semi-closely and from what I've been reading, people seem to think it plays more like Warcraft than a Diablo game. A friend of mine in the beta said it wasn't much fun and was really lacking the atmosphere of the previous Diablo's. I also hate the new talent system. Blizzard simply doesn't understand how to make talent systems or what people want with talent builds-- just look at what they did to the "talent system" WoW will have in the next expansion. Diablo 3's talent system is crafted specifically so that your character is as gear dependant as possible so you end up using their auction house crap.
  9. People have every reason to be upset if they so wish. I have never played any of the Mass Effect games but I have a friend who liked the series a lot, only to be pissed with the conclusion. Darkman 4 basically hit it on the head; Bioware allowed people to upload their saves from the prior games with the promise that your actions would effect the conclusion you receive-- but that apparently is not the case at all. Many people are probably also annoyed that they had to pay money to unlock content that was included on the disc (obvious cash-in from cut content) and possibly some of it is even backlash against Bioware and EA overall. I do not really understand how that makes them twats. These days being a fan of almost anything just means you're ripped off at every available opportunity.
  10. Sig-ma

    Half-Life 1 vs Halo 1

    You're entitled to your opinion of course, but there is a reason most recent memorable first-person games (F.E.A.R., Doom 3, Skyrim, Bioshock, etc.) lifted their intro sequences from Half-Life's framework. HL2 has some of the most memorable characters I've ever seen in a game. I'm not really sure what you mean. Even Dog had more personality than the Doom or Quake marines. :-P The brilliance comes from Freeman's role in the story-line. I'm also not sure what you mean with him not interacting with anyone. Just because HL doesn't ask you to press the use key to access some bullshit contrived responses that make no difference in the overall scheme of the story-line doesn't mean he doesn't interact with anyone. Good story-telling weaves exposition and characterization through the length of the experience and HL does just that. As a silent protagonist, his responses would be whatever you choose but seeing as you're a puppet, you have no choice anyway. I'd have to disagree with both of you. The problem is, a strict comparison between the two games isn't really viable beyond a subjective (but ultimately, intimate) opinion. Technology has a lot to do with it. Doom never had the same chance of telling a story like Half-Life (or even Doom 3) did. In Doom, you can't look up or down, crouch, jump, the enemies are ridiculously stupid and most of the weapons are interchangeable. You could fire up DoomBuilder and make a big square room and with half-decent monster placement, it would still be fairly enjoyable for awhile. Again, you could make the argument Doom has better combat but that is all it really has over Half-Life. Doom has no story. As far as level-design, I am inclined to think you're not looking at it objectively at all because Doom had a lot of ridiculously shit level design. Slough of Despair? Dis? Fortress of Mystery? I understand that id Software had initially intended to make Doom "more realistic," but it simply would not have worked because of how limited the engine was. Even with the advanced source-ports available today, bots and NPC's don't really work that well (at least I haven't seen any that were as convincing as those in the original Half-Life, even). Considering it would have implied text-driven dialog and everything else, it really would have been to the detriment to the game. Half-Life does not have that problem. You can't really claim one game is strictly better than another based on only one aspect of both games. As far as Halo is concerned, yeah... it probably does have more enjoyable combat than the original Half-Life but again, it should considering how old and largely experimental Half-Life was. Even when Halo was released many considered it to be a bland FPS and since it did nothing all that special beyond that (being a good console FPS, which owes it continued success largely to Xbox Live), it isn't all that surprising how most people here voted.
  11. Sig-ma

    Half-Life 1 vs Halo 1

    Half-Life, for sure. The whole point of Half-Life's method of story-telling is there are no cut-scenes and you never lose control of your character. The tram ride and intro sequence are part of the pacing of the overall game. Rather than throwing you into the action like Doom or Quake does and feeding you the story through text or cut-scenes, Half-Life raised the bar by creating tension and a more believable environment via immersion. The beginning section of it are part of that and your knowledge of the overall story comes from what you invest into it. Had Half-Life thrown you into the action right away, the story-telling would not have had the same overall effect-- likewise, with Half-Life 2, had you just started on the boat running away from civil protection, sure... it may not seem as "boring," but it would have lost immersion. The whole G-Man manipulating your fate thing and over-arching story would not have had the same effect. Despite being a silent protagonist, Gordon Freeman has far more characterization built up throughout the series through his actions and through the characters he interacts with, than Master Chief does through Halo. The most brilliant part of it (which several games have since ripped off) is Valve, knowing he would ultimately be a puppet of the player, specifically designed him to be just that in the game's overall story and worked in such that it actually makes sense. You have the illusion of free-choice (as in any decent, story-driven game) but due to whatever myriad of reasons, you really don't have any choice. Hence the whole "Freeman" word play thing the Vortigaunts knowingly taunt you with. I definitely would not say "way better," but overall, I probably would agree purely from the combat perspective. The first Half-Life definitely did not age well in many aspects. Even so, despite all of the obvious advantages Halo should have (even just from technology advancements) over Half-Life, that isn't much to write home about. You could create a pretty convincing argument about how Doom has better combat over both, despite being several years older than either game.
  12. Sig-ma

    What was your game of 2011?

    This thread reminds me of how many titles I still would like to play or have wanted to purchase still... Alice: Madness Returns, Dark Souls (if it is ever released on PC), Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Hard Reset, Witcher 2... I have no interest in Batman: Arkham City, Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3 or Duke Nukem Forever however. Agreed. That was one (of several) of the bad business decisions I commented on. The end-game content overall was rather weak and it was odd going from the ridiculous abundance of shit to do in Wrath to the relative boredom and lack of shit to do in Cataclysm. The old world redesign was hit-or-miss for me as well. I really could go on and on but I'll refrain from doing so-- no one needs or wants to hear it. ;-) Despite all of the shit Warcraft receives, I have many fond memories with it. Wrath was mostly very well designed, fun to play and I liked the difficulty of heroic modes and then being able to jump into 10-man's with some close friends late at night and casually blow through the content, joking around and making fun of each other. Burning Crusade was awesome as well, even if the raid content (mostly my raid schedule at the time and guild I was with) frustrated the shit out of me from time to time.
  13. Sig-ma

    What was your game of 2011?

    Best of 2011... The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim - While plagued by issues and glitches you'd come to expect from any Bethesda game, I've still managed to invest more time into Skyrim than any other game released this year and for the most part, I've had fun doing it. The bulk of the quests are memorable, the world itself is interesting and the immersion is top-notch. I only wish Bethesda would release the development kit (or fix many of the issues, including the glowing blue eyes glitch). Portal 2 - An awesome SP experience with some fantastic set-pieces and puzzles, coupled with some of the best co-op I've ever experienced. Bastion - I was surprised by this one. The default key-bindings are terrible (I dare say some of the trials are entirely impossible using them) and it can be a frustrating trial and error session occasionally, but the story and overall experience are incredible. I attempted a new game plus with all of the shrines activated and it became probably the most difficult game I have ever played and provided some of the most intense encounters I can recall. There is a great sense of accomplishment to be had with Bastion. Just Cause 2 - While not actually from 2011, I never had the chance to play it until this past year. Just Cause 2 is by no means perfect. The story is whatever, many of the objectives are tedious, the island can be exhausting to travel over due to the sheer size of it and it is a horrible game to just pick up and play for thirty minutes or so, but when you play it just for fun and don't let everything else wear you down, it is pure fun and can be outright hilarious. It reminded me of just how much fun open-world games like this can be, something I haven't experienced the same way since Grand Theft Auto 3. Fear 2: Project Origin - Again, not from 2011 but didn't bother with it until I picked it up on a Steam sale for ridiculously cheap. I was pleasantly surprised by it. The story is more coherent than the first Fear, the shooting can be intense and it can be terribly moody at times. Fear 2 is probably one of the better and most memorable FPS games I've played in recent years, though my praise of it may be due (in part) to the fact I wasn't expecting much from it to begin with. It's always great when you're blown away by something you jump into thinking it will suck! Worst or Most Disappointing of 2011... Rage - What can I say? Considering many of my favorite FPS titles were created by id Software (or built around id Software engines / properties; Doom and Return to Castle Wolfenstein), I was hyped about Rage, which I rarely allow myself to do. Unlike everyone else however, I liked Doom 3. I even liked Quake 4. Why wouldn't I be hyped, then? As it drew closer to release date however and I realized it wouldn't be an open-world game and the driving was primarily a novelty, my excitement subsided quite a bit. Upon playing it, I was nothing but disappointed. Rage is easily one of the most contrived, uninspired FPS games I've ever played. Couple that with linear level design, forgettable MP, a short SP campaign, launch issues, a horrible story and one of the least climatic end battles / horrible endings I've ever seen and you have one of the worst games I personally played during 2011. Trine 2 - As someone who loved the first Trine, Trine 2 was an easy sell for me. Like Rage, I wished I hadn't. Trine 2 has no reason to exist. Almost everything it does, Trine did first and did better. Trine 2 has some of the most irritating and unfulfilling puzzles, frustrating platforming sections and mundane boss battles I've experienced as of late. Luckily, the wizard floating trick still remains unfixed from the first game, or else I probably wouldn't have bothered completing it. Using the hints feature to illustrate how the developers intended you to complete their contrived puzzles doesn't help it either, as far as I'm concerned. World of Warcraft: Cataclysm - Against my better judgment, I picked up the newest expansion to Blizzard's MMORPG primarily because many of my friends still played and they needed me to complete the raid content. Two months into it and everyone quit. Watered down and homogenized class design, poor story and multiple bad business decisions caused a cataclysm for nothing but Warcraft's subscription base, costing them nearly 4 million subscribers. I've been Warcraft free for almost a year now and much happier overall. =) Fear 3 - I purchased Fear 3 when it was released coming from anticipation for it following my playthrough of Fear 2 (being that the Fear sale, which included Fear 2, was to promote Fear 3). Fear 3 would have been okay if it had been more Fear 2 but instead, it became a bland, CoD clone, complete with achievements, a level-up system, linear level design, cover-based mechanics and mundane enemies sniping at you from being chest-high walls. I should have seen it coming, especially since it wasn't even developed by Monolith. The cherry on top was that it wasn't even remotely moody or scary and the story was horrible, despite John Carpenter's hands being involved with it. Death and the Fly - I'm only adding this to round out my most disappointing / worst list at 5 games each. Death and the Fly is not my worst game of 2011, it is the winner of my worst game of all time award. I purchased it because it looked interesting but otherwise knew nothing about it. This game is terrible in every conceivable way. Changing your wallpaper on your desktop is more fun than playing this game.
  14. Sig-ma

    Your lame theories about the Paranormal

    I do not believe that is the case. The main problem is really just a lack of supporting evidence. A scientist is not likely to question someone saw something as a general rule but question what they believe they saw; that is how it should be. I just don't appreciate the hostility. Individual reality is subjective. As as child, I was fascinated by stories of aliens, ghosts and especially with religion but never really believed in any of it. I have just about as much contempt for unimaginative, prating-slaves as I do for people who exert excessive effort to convert me to believe in their bullshit. When it comes to uncertainties such as what the paranormal is composed of, people should be encouraged to discuss what they've experienced or what they believe in an effort to broaden the knowledge base, not champion debate points they cannot stand behind or argue vehemently about issues that cannot be known. Even if it is all bullshit, it makes for interesting stories.
  15. Sig-ma

    Your lame theories about the Paranormal

    This really is not the case, unfortunately. Hair DNA analysis is rarely conclusive. You either need a preserved hair sheath (which is kind of a crap-shoot considering the environment it was collected in) or another hair to compare it to (for a strict analysis). Further, I would not speak entirely for the scientific world, if I were you. Inspired by this thread, I decided to ask several of my co-workers (five of them) what they believed about the existence of Sasquatch and none of them dismissed it, somewhat to my surprise but did believe it to be unlikely. One directed me to a BBC news article speaking about some hairs collected. The article points out that there are certainly precedents for Sasquatch-like creatures. The question many scientists seem to have is whether or not such a creature (or one like it) exists today (unlikely) and if not, what precisely are they dealing with? On a whim, I also looked up what Danarchy said about killing a Sasquatch in Washington being illegal and to my amazement, there really is a law prohibiting it, carrying a sentence of a $1,000 fine and 5 years imprisonment. Crazy stuff! EDIT: I spent a few hours looking more into the entire subject, seeing as I never really had and it just doesn't sound consistent with anything that would (or could) exist at this point in time. While stories about such creatures have existed for hundreds (if not thousands) of years and are known all over the planet, so many of them are easily attributable to other animals, events or known hoaxes. Even the hair studied in that article I linked ended up being goat hair.
×