Hunter5024's forum posts

#1 Posted by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

If you ignore the obnoxious bullshit it seems kinda fun I guess.

Online
#2 Posted by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

@hunter5024 said:

I talked a bunch of shit about this movie when it was announced, so I'm eating some crow when I say that I enjoyed it. It was like a less serious version of Star Wars, pretty cool. I don't feel like it added a whole lot to their cinematic universe, but personally I prefer it that way. I have to wonder if they'll have a place in the Avengers movie. It would be weird to see Rocket Raccoon fighting alongside Captain America.

This movie actually adds more to the cinematic universe then any of the other films combined. We are introduced to (among other things) the Kree, the Novas and the Celestials. We are also given more details about the infinity gems and Thanos (who is pretty much guaranteed to be the bad guy in Avengers 3).

I suppose "added" was a bad word, what I meant was that it didn't "expand" on a whole lot. They introduced new stuff (like what you mentioned) but the stuff from the other movies was left pretty much alone (unless you count Thanos as a previously introduced element which I don't). There was no Nick Fury, no mention of other heroes, or anything like that. Whereas Iron Man 3 dealt with a lot of The Avengers fallout, and Winter Soldier had a lot to do with SHIELD. It was very much its own thing, which I liked.

Online
#3 Posted by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

I talked a bunch of shit about this movie when it was announced, so I'm eating some crow when I say that I enjoyed it. It was like a less serious version of Star Wars, pretty cool. I don't feel like it added a whole lot to their cinematic universe, but personally I prefer it that way. I have to wonder if they'll have a place in the Avengers movie. It would be weird to see Rocket Raccoon fighting alongside Captain America.

Online
#4 Edited by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

Music continues to be the only medium with dumber genre classifications than video games.

Online
#5 Posted by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

While I'm kind of looking forward to this game, I'm not sure how I feel about this Nintendo Direct trend where they focus on one game. It really makes them feel like ads to me. And I guess from a cynical perspective that is what they are, but I guess it just feels more blatant when they focus on a single game? I don't know. Here's hoping there's some cool news.

Online
#6 Posted by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

With the exception of Kevin Vanord, Shaun Mcinnis, and Danny O Dwyer you just listed everyone I know who works at Gamespot. What a damn shame.

Online
#7 Edited by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

Maybe I would feel the same way if I had a small apartment and a big enough income to buy every game I want to play. Personally I'm kinda bummed I bought Wolfenstein in the Steam sale because my friends want to borrow it and I can't loan it to them. And it turns out physical copies are going for the same amount on amazon as they were during the sale (whereas Steam is currently selling it for 60 dollars). It's not that Wolfenstein is super special to me (although it is rad), it's that it makes more practical sense for me to own the physical version. I'm under the impression that people like me aren't so uncommon, particularly when you get further away from enthusiasts like us.

Online
#8 Posted by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

@zeik said:

@hunter5024 said:

@yummylee: Yeah, that specialization was a blast to play too. I hope they bring it back. Also Mark Laidlaw confirmed on Twitter that he's a Rogue so mystery solved. I'm pretty sure I'm using Cole now, because a Rogue Mage sounds awesome. Now they just need to make some sort of Rogue Warrior and I'll be set.

If I had to guess I'd assume he'll resemble Fenris from DA2 a bit, who had those weird sorta-magicky abilities that were kinda incorporated into his unique skills, but he still fundamentally played like a Warrior. I doubt they'll give a Rogue actual magic spells.

Yeah that's what I was imagining too, but that would still be totally rad.

Online
#9 Posted by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

@yummylee: Yeah, that specialization was a blast to play too. I hope they bring it back. Also Mark Laidlaw confirmed on Twitter that he's a Rogue so mystery solved. I'm pretty sure I'm using Cole now, because a Rogue Mage sounds awesome. Now they just need to make some sort of Rogue Warrior and I'll be set.

Online
#10 Edited by Hunter5024 (5600 posts) -

@yummylee said:

@hunter5024 said:
@yummylee said:

If any class is maybe a little over-represented it's the Mage, as there's four of them! Though of course Mages are probably the most versatile class, and since Mages factor so heavily in the premise of the story, it makes sense that they'd want to insert a lot of opposing opinions into the Inquisition. One's a circle mage, one's an apostate, one's an abomination, and one hails from the Tevinter Imperium so, they all have very different backgrounds and ideologies no doubt.

I believe Cole is a rogue actually. Of the stabby variety.

Wait, really?... So you're right! That's weird, considering he's also like a... spirit or abomination or something. Cool, good to know. I think I'm already envisioning my party anywhoo, with me as a dwarven tank, Sera, Cole, and whichever of the mages specialises in healing. Probably Solas if I had to make a guess.

Hmm. Now I'm not sure. They posted this image on the official Facebook for Dragon Age, but apparently he's a mage in his previous appearance. So either the Facebook page goofed, or his class is a rogue despite the fact that he's a mage narratively. I guess there's nothing stopping a mage from learning to pick locks and use daggers, and it could lead to a cool unique skill tree where he combines these talents, if that's the case.

Online