There are some big names tied to this game. R.A. Salvatore and Ken Rolston have a history of creating rich fantasy worlds. So it's exciting that they are working on a new one. Together! And its good to hear that the combat looks promising. Melee seems to be an Achilles heels for RPGs off-late.
Origins was too slow and prodding, DA2 sped up the action so much that it came across as comical at times, The Witcher 2 is just frustrating w/ a whole lot of dodging and not much hitting. CDProjekt had the right idea or at least they were name dropping the right game (Batman AA) but Geralt just can't string hits like the bat.
With the way character action games are incorporating RPG elements with deep skill trees and talent choices, it's about time RPGs started to learn from the action genre and improve their combat. Choices shouldn't be limited to just stat screens and pre-planning - players should be given the option to branch out into reactionary combos instinctively on the battlefield. It's what made Mass Effect 2 more fun than the first - I had to actually use my shooting skills for once, instead of pouring all my points into Barrier & Immunity and dancing my way through Insanity (like ME1)
Hello Bombers, I'm looking for a new RTS to dive into, preferably one that's fast paced and has a good single player campaign. I was hoping you guys could help me find one, because I'm coming up blank. I've already exhausted the following (somewhat recent) options:
Retribution & Chaos Rising
Sup Com 2
Total War: Shogun 2 (I only tried the demo and didn't like it. Sadly, I haven't liked a Total War game since Empire)
Men of War
I'm still playing a lot of SC2 but its mostly trying wonky builds against AI, single player for achievements or random custom games. I don't think SC2 multiplayer is for me though, besides I can't seem to find anyone regular to play with and the game gets boring alone anyway.
I do enjoy RTS single player campaigns, especially something like Relic's DOW or Company of Heroes games. But I can't seem to find anything similar to that. Is the genre really as dry as it seems at the moment?
Boy, that certainly put a smile on my face after a monstrous Monday. Thanks for the starlet feature, though I feel more like a troublemaker than an actual contributor around here! (ZP probably still hates me for making him change the spotlight format and locking him into a weekly obligation)
Anyway, here's something constructive (or maybe destructive: I nominate BiffMcBlumpkin for a starlet spot. No offense to other GB users but he has made me laugh more than anyone else on the site. His forum history reads like a standup routine. Or if you're looking for someone more articulate: DanKempster - I swear, he is one of the best writers on the site but just doesn't get the readership he deserves. Maybe he should just start including hot button words like "anime, japan, voyeuristic fanart" in his blog titles.
" Killjoi definitely deserves the coveted Starlet spot this week. I consider him my list rival, though from his perspective it's probably closer to this sort of scenario. For the time being I shall simply be thankful for the blog mention, and bide my time. "
Ha! I'm not sure how I became the list guy around here - I've only made 7 of them over nearly 3 years. And I could only aspire to your clever wordplays; seriously Chie Satonaka= "Oh, A Steak? Can I?" kills me every time.
" @Killjoi: It's not my call, but I'd say the thing that qualifies "game" pages to be "game" pages is being an actual game. Requiring another game to play it disqualifies it from being a "game." But again, I don't make the calls, it's up to one of the staff. "
That's an odd stance to take when there are "games" like Cataclysm that require not one, not two but three prior games to play (Original WoW, Burning Crusade and Wrath of the Lich King). Trying to fit all that information on a single page would be quite the task.
Even Wikipedia, a database infamous for its stringent rules against superfluous pages, lists Undead Nightmare, Awakening and Shivering Isles separately. Why exactly are you so zealous about deleting these pages on GB, when they clearly serve a purpose ?
" @Killjoi: The rule is regarding downloadable content that has been released on a disc. Since there is a "DLC Add-Ons" section on game pages specifically for that. Expansion packs that were solely released in physical form are fine. As are DLC packs that are released as standalone physical discs. "
Expansions are no longer released "solely" in physical form. Everything is downloadable now. Shivering Isles was the first of many. DLC packs are rarely standalone either.
These retail releases are always big enough updates that they require their own page. Titles like Undead Nightmare or Awakening can be listed under DLC Addons section as well but deleting them for fear of redundancy is a myopic view of how the industry works these days.
These are all major titles that sold more than a million copies by themselves. Yeah, let's not have a page for them. Good going!
General rule of the thumb should be: As long as a game/expansion has a retail release, it qualifies for its own page; irrespective of its dependencies. It's pretty much how wikipedia and mobygames work.