Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 djphranq wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
Been playing Shogun 2 again. Fall of the Samurai this time.

Also been playing coop divinity original sin and some age of wonders 3.

I need to try out Shogun 2... I've had a copy in my steam library for some time now and haven't even bothered to touch it. Same with Age of Wonders 3.

Both are a great deal of fun. Im (not) painting samurai atm so Shogun great for inspiration. Go play it now


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:
Reinstalled tropico 5 since I have room after uninstalling some stuff. Nice and relaxing...

Is it much different to 3 and 4?

It's different enough to justify getting it. It's most similar to 4+xpac.

Thanks

I felt like powering through Skyrim's main quest today, but hit a stumbling block when it came to the peace treaty thing. The last time this quest came up I decided to just win the war for the Imperials, so I thought I'd do the same again, but with the Stormcloaks. Problem is, damn are civil wars depressing. I couldn't help thinking the whole time that all the guys I was killing should have been my allies. The whole point behind that war was it was orchestrated by the Thalmor to keep the humans split. Hmph.

The game then bugged out when it came to the siege of Falkreath however and I had to go back and reload my save from before I started the civil war questline. Ah, I think I'll just attend the peace treaty this time and see what happens. Just a pity that none of the civil war variants of either side's soldiers spawn until the war starts. I mean those from the mod Civil War Overhaul. It would have been nice to see all the different Imperial ranks and races chucking about regularly, the same goes for the Stormcloak's mercenary units.

Its also a pity that Bethesda didn't put the time in to work on the Thalmor in general actually. They really feel like they're there to set up for something, but you never really engage with them. I suppose that's what the cancelled Hammerfell DLC would have been for (they just had to chuck that to work on the online game, eugh), as at the moment the whole situation seems rather unfulfilling.

Been hopping between MLB the Show on PS4, and "The Crew" on PC.


For the life of me, I just cannot fething figure out WHY Crew is a "mandatory online" game... it seriously has nothing that truly requires internet aside from an idiotic tweak of you must choose between coop and solo on story/faction missions. Seriously, the only place where its obvious you need a connection is when you drive to a PvP arena... which bugs me because I'd much rather have played the game on my playstation, but Im not paying monthly for PS+, therefore I cannot play the Crew on it.

 Wyrmalla wrote:
I felt like powering through Skyrim's main quest today, but hit a stumbling block when it came to the peace treaty thing. The last time this quest came up I decided to just win the war for the Imperials, so I thought I'd do the same again, but with the Stormcloaks. Problem is, damn are civil wars depressing. I couldn't help thinking the whole time that all the guys I was killing should have been my allies. The whole point behind that war was it was orchestrated by the Thalmor to keep the humans split. Hmph.

The game then bugged out when it came to the siege of Falkreath however and I had to go back and reload my save from before I started the civil war questline. Ah, I think I'll just attend the peace treaty this time and see what happens. Just a pity that none of the civil war variants of either side's soldiers spawn until the war starts. I mean those from the mod Civil War Overhaul. It would have been nice to see all the different Imperial ranks and races chucking about regularly, the same goes for the Stormcloak's mercenary units.

Its also a pity that Bethesda didn't put the time in to work on the Thalmor in general actually. They really feel like they're there to set up for something, but you never really engage with them. I suppose that's what the cancelled Hammerfell DLC would have been for (they just had to chuck that to work on the online game, eugh), as at the moment the whole situation seems rather unfulfilling.

You realize that Bethesda Softworks didn't do much, if any, work on ESO, right? It was almost all Zenimax Online, their sister.

 Wyrmalla wrote:
I felt like powering through Skyrim's main quest today, but hit a stumbling block when it came to the peace treaty thing. The last time this quest came up I decided to just win the war for the Imperials, so I thought I'd do the same again, but with the Stormcloaks. Problem is, damn are civil wars depressing. I couldn't help thinking the whole time that all the guys I was killing should have been my allies. The whole point behind that war was it was orchestrated by the Thalmor to keep the humans split. Hmph.

The game then bugged out when it came to the siege of Falkreath however and I had to go back and reload my save from before I started the civil war questline. Ah, I think I'll just attend the peace treaty this time and see what happens. Just a pity that none of the civil war variants of either side's soldiers spawn until the war starts. I mean those from the mod Civil War Overhaul. It would have been nice to see all the different Imperial ranks and races chucking about regularly, the same goes for the Stormcloak's mercenary units.

Its also a pity that Bethesda didn't put the time in to work on the Thalmor in general actually. They really feel like they're there to set up for something, but you never really engage with them. I suppose that's what the cancelled Hammerfell DLC would have been for (they just had to chuck that to work on the online game, eugh), as at the moment the whole situation seems rather unfulfilling.

I agree. Hopefully the next Elder Scrolls game will deal with the Thalmor.

 Wyrmalla wrote:
I felt like powering through Skyrim's main quest today, but hit a stumbling block when it came to the peace treaty thing. The last time this quest came up I decided to just win the war for the Imperials, so I thought I'd do the same again, but with the Stormcloaks. Problem is, damn are civil wars depressing. I couldn't help thinking the whole time that all the guys I was killing should have been my allies. The whole point behind that war was it was orchestrated by the Thalmor to keep the humans split. Hmph.

The game then bugged out when it came to the siege of Falkreath however and I had to go back and reload my save from before I started the civil war questline. Ah, I think I'll just attend the peace treaty this time and see what happens. Just a pity that none of the civil war variants of either side's soldiers spawn until the war starts. I mean those from the mod Civil War Overhaul. It would have been nice to see all the different Imperial ranks and races chucking about regularly, the same goes for the Stormcloak's mercenary units.

Its also a pity that Bethesda didn't put the time in to work on the Thalmor in general actually. They really feel like they're there to set up for something, but you never really engage with them. I suppose that's what the cancelled Hammerfell DLC would have been for (they just had to chuck that to work on the online game, eugh), as at the moment the whole situation seems rather unfulfilling.

I feel the same way, although it's more of a "I'll ally with them because I have to" with the stormcloaks (damn speciesist, just because I'm a kajit doesn't mean I'm a thief. I mean I am a thief.... but shutup, that doesn't matter!).



Personally I hope the next game is set in Elswyr. Would be a nice change from the usual generic medieval European landscape. You could do lots of stuff, deserts (and there are loads of different kind of deserts), jungles, swamps ect.

Skyrim has the worst story of any video game seen in a long time. It literally is a zero effort, sit down one afternoon "story". Really liked the game, but even FIFA games have a better story.

Anvildude wrote:

 Wyrmalla wrote:
I felt like powering through Skyrim's main quest today, but hit a stumbling block when it came to the peace treaty thing. The last time this quest came up I decided to just win the war for the Imperials, so I thought I'd do the same again, but with the Stormcloaks. Problem is, damn are civil wars depressing. I couldn't help thinking the whole time that all the guys I was killing should have been my allies. The whole point behind that war was it was orchestrated by the Thalmor to keep the humans split. Hmph.

The game then bugged out when it came to the siege of Falkreath however and I had to go back and reload my save from before I started the civil war questline. Ah, I think I'll just attend the peace treaty this time and see what happens. Just a pity that none of the civil war variants of either side's soldiers spawn until the war starts. I mean those from the mod Civil War Overhaul. It would have been nice to see all the different Imperial ranks and races chucking about regularly, the same goes for the Stormcloak's mercenary units.

Its also a pity that Bethesda didn't put the time in to work on the Thalmor in general actually. They really feel like they're there to set up for something, but you never really engage with them. I suppose that's what the cancelled Hammerfell DLC would have been for (they just had to chuck that to work on the online game, eugh), as at the moment the whole situation seems rather unfulfilling.

You realize that Bethesda Softworks didn't do much, if any, work on ESO, right? It was almost all Zenimax Online, their sister.

Meh, OK I mean Fallout 4 then, or whatever game Bethesda's working on that needs all those devs. Not that they've came out with much lately that isn't stuff they've stuck their names on whilst others developed them.

The next Elder Scrolls game won't be out for another five years or so, so hopefully things will improve somewhat by then. Notably I'd like it if that game was actually finished. Skyrim just has so many loose ends that its dire for completionists. I can see Fallout 4 following Skyrim's tact a bit, which I don't see as such a bad thing. I mean Skyrim was a definite step up over Oblivion and Fallout 3 in terms of the world and dialogue (its hardly amazing, but I replayed both of those games last year and couldn't help but cringe). In any case they still have an informal agreement with Obsidian, so at least we'll have a decent game from them a couple of years down the line. =P

I started a new character (again) in Skyrim. This one almost froze to death in the ocean till I realised having the freeze to death mod turned on at that point was probably a bad idea. I have the Organized Bandits mod turned on, so hopefully that'll make things a bit more interesting. I also have a mod where you can act like a bard on too, which hopefully will let me follow a less "wragh I hit things with my sword" playstyle. ...Not that you can play a non-combat character in Skyrim. Hmn, unless I tote about with some followers. ...I hate followers however (someone please tell me why Bethesda threw out Obsidian's New Vegas follower's interface for the old cumbersome dialogue tree system).

As much as i like skyrim (though usually get bored with it when i hit about level 40-60 and become untouchable in a fight) i'll admit it's got flaws. Least a bunch of the bugs were hilarious usually. I remember one area where if you teleport there no horse and move just a little you'd levitate hundreds of feet off the ground and then fall to your doom. It'd kill your horse but i think my character always lived. That's the funny thing this game and xcom: enemy unknown/enemy within had a lot of bugs.

Speaking of xcom does anybody wish they'd add more enemy human sub-factions to face or have an EXALT focused expansion where you play as EXALT and fight both xcom and somewhat the aliens. Just as long as they give EXALT more crap it'd make sense for an interesting alternate timeline game.

I've also been wondering about the game 'endless legend'. My computer must be having some problems running it when i played it during the free weekend for it but i enjoyed it just like i enjoyed endless space. Has anybody else played 'endless legend' and enjoyed it? I played the necromorphs which are kind of like the cravers from endless space and have even been theorized to be them. Anyway i thoroughly enjoy this game and its lore. It just looks very cool and story is the only thing i wanted more of (it seems to tell it via objects without much actual storyline). Does anybody recommend it or no?

 Sigvatr wrote:
Skyrim has the worst story of any video game seen in a long time. It literally is a zero effort, sit down one afternoon "story". Really liked the game, but even FIFA games have a better story.

An ocean with the depth of a puddle is a line DayZ's creator Dean Hall came up with once when talking about that game with TotalBiscuit. Its certainly true, if you want anything more than a open world romping experience then you'll have to look elsewhere. Witcher 3's coming out soon however, so its not like it'll have a monopoly at even that aspect much more.

Wife's played 2 hours of TWIII so far and goes along with the enormous praise it gets from media.

Witcher III will be the, by far, best modern RPG and likely one of the best games ever.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Wife's played 2 hours of TWIII so far and goes along with the enormous praise it gets from media.

That kind of always confused me. I've known at least a couple girls that actually enjoyed 'The Witcher' and it just doesn't seem like they're the target audience. I'm not saying people can't enjoy what they love as some love their 'ponies' but it just feels strange to me. Mostly it's the fact that Geralt is kind of a man-***** and pretty much bangs any and every woman. I suppose they could enjoy it from the female perspective but Geralt (a dude that looks like a necromancer/corpse with cat eyes) doesn't exactly seem like the most exciting sexual partner unless you're into having sex with dead bodies and/or are a twilight fan in which case you may want to seek help.

Ah, the logic of that argument is that the player has to want to bang their player character in every game they play... There's the types of games that people think women should play, and only play, then there's the real world where people have their own tastes and can play whatever they like. ...Or do I need to link you to the umpteen posts on NotAlwaysRight.Com of video game shop employees refusing to sell women games like Call of Duty and advising them to go punt at the 3DS games instead?

Hang on, Mel will be here shortly.

 Wyrmalla wrote:
Ah, the logic of that argument is that the player has to want to bang their player character in every game they play... There's the types of games that people think women should play, and only play, then there's the real world where people have their own tastes and can play whatever they like. ...Or do I need to link you to the umpteen posts on NotAlwaysRight.Com of video game shop employees refusing to sell women games like Call of Duty and advising them to go punt at the 3DS games instead?

Hang on, Mel will be here shortly.

No i mean it's a rather large part of the game that's hard to avoid. As in the first game had you getting it on with 3 women per several hour play-through. I suppose a lot of these are by choice but it's just strange.

Honestly i don't care i'm just confused by it. I even stated it's their choice to play or not. I was merely curious.

I banged Zevran's brains out in Dragon Age: Origins as both male and female characters. I made a female character in Mass Effect 2 just so I could hook up with Thane. I'm a guy, but I can play a female character in a video game even though they're off hooking up with the opposite sex (hmn, though the male Shepard finally having a gay option in the third Mass Effect game was appreciated to).

If its an aspect of the narrative then I don't see how just because the player's a different sex than the character means they're disconnected. I mean say the character was instead from a different culture than you and they were going about doing something you don't have experience of (though this perhaps isn't the best analogy), that doesn't mean you can't immerse yourself in the situation otherwise you wouldn't wind up enjoying any game you played. I mean I'm no super human cyborg that punches people through walls, but I liked Deus Ex:Human Revolution enough. =P

But yeah, watch out for Thane. ...Just saying if you lick his skin you'll go blind.

 Wyrmalla wrote:
I banged Zevran's brains out in Dragon Age: Origins as both male and female characters. I made a female character in Mass Effect 2 just so I could hook up with Thane. I'm a guy, but I can play a female character in a video game even though they're off hooking up with the opposite sex (hmn, though the male Shepard finally having a gay option in the third Mass Effect game was appreciated to).

If its an aspect of the narrative then I don't see how just because the player's a different sex than the character means they're disconnected. I mean say the character was instead from a different culture than you and they were going about doing something you don't have experience of (though this perhaps isn't the best analogy), that doesn't mean you can't immerse yourself in the situation otherwise you wouldn't wind up enjoying any game you played. I mean I'm no super human cyborg that punches people through walls, but I liked Deus Ex:Human Revolution enough. =P

But yeah, watch out for Thane. ...Just saying if you lick his skin you'll go blind.

Yeah the inter-species sex bit is also kind of weird. Not saying i have anything against that but who's to say the parts would even line up correctly (since they evolved through an entirely different group on another planet) or if they'd even be satisfied of it. You do know dolphins can actually move their erm man parts with regular muscles and have control of it. Jeez i heard they can grab things with it. That's hilarious, awesome and disturbing all at once. Some species are just too strong and may physically hurt or kill the other in the process.

I will admit i did get it with zevran in my dragon age: origins play-through as well and found it funny and a bit uncomfortable. It's just in the first 'Witcher' game it was near constant. I mean for me gay sex is kind of a nothing thing for arousal (some people find it weird i don't get aroused by two women that are gay for each other but i keep it in mind they're gay and not bi). That is the key difference. For me when it's straight and it has people that i'm interested in i enjoy it. That's just personal preference though. I just don't see why people would find Geralt attractive in some cases. He's often times kinda creepy looking. I guess though it is personal preference.

For me personally when playing games like that the sex often times detracts from the game. I just prefer to split my interests. If i want to watch dirty things i just flip some on and fulfill my needs. Playing a game for 3 hours and getting several sexual inducing things breaks my immersion. Once again it's different for everybody but i'm just curious what they think when playing said game.

Oh and just to let you know i don't judge women for liking action games. I rather enjoy girls that are more tomboyish actually so long as they remember the difference between assertiveness and purely aggressive stances.

I've been playing some GTA V. The ending was kind of lame but overall I really liked the game. I think it is one of the best in the series. Maybe tied with San Andreas which I felt had a stronger story.

So there was a free game on the steam homepage. "sunrider: mask of arcadias". It's a visual novel mixed with a top down tactical space ship game. Pretty fun, although it;s still in beta. It's pretty polishd though, and they have gotten what's there done very well, although I'd love it see it expanded, and have the devs hire an animator. It's of interest, however, for being brutily hard. I love tactical games, and am quite good at them, and I the normal mode was a bit too hard for me at parts. And there is two more levels of difficulty above that. Although for anyone interted, I will warn you, there is a naked shower scene out of fething nowhere, only one image though, and it's for like a paragraph. Kind of caught me off guard though, as I was playing in my cafeteria.


I'd definitively recommend checking it out if you are into tactical games though. Or visual novels (they have a special VN mode that makes the battles really easy.

I just finished another Mass Effect series playthrough. Those games are just... Just...



RIP Mordin and Legion <3

<3 Garrus

<3 like effing everyone, actually!

...If you were in Shepard's shoes and given the same information and options, what would you choose? I would definitely go for Paragon Control. Not at all an easy choice, yet an inevitable conclusion. The others have too many drawbacks (forcing synthesis onto a galaxy that might not want it and the ethical/moral problems of doing so, and the death of EDI and the geth in the case of Destroy). Control is like the best of both worlds, and seems like the 'good' ending.

Control would provide the galaxy with mighty peacekeepers in the Reapers (who would need a new name - 'Guardians'?) who can share their technology and knowledge. And if the Leviathans decide it's time to go apex race once more, the Reapers could prevent that.

Free download of Army of Two; Devil's Cartel. The controls are still as clunky as the first game, and it's broken into much shorter segments

Was about to play skyrim and decided i was bored so i started up 'shogun 2: fall of the samurai' again.

Also worth noting for all of you Galactic Civilizations 3 releases in a little more than 2 weeks. Yep the full game. I'm rather excited to see the full version actually. Oddly enough it's the campaign i'm most interested in.

Ok, finished up sunrider. 8 hours, although it's probably should be more like 10, as I accidentally skipped a few side missions (pretty good for a free game). That and I'm really good at tactical games, but damn is that game frustratingly hard. I might try and to a play-through on spacewhale mode (the hardest difficulty) just to see how long it takes me .

I'd really like to see the dev take the battles and management features of that game and make another, more expansive game. It felt like there was available progression in that game that I couldn't get to because there wasn't enough battles. Although it did leave at a bit of a cliffhanger, so a sequel might be possible.

I also discovered that I kind of like the visual novel form (makes sense, I like books, video games, and a good portion of animu), so I might try some more of those.

Played Viscera Cleanup Detail with my brother, we managed to snap the Employee of the Month achievement somehow.

Kerbal Space Program 1.0.

and, holey moley its fun! From the nail-biting reentry to actual AERODYNAMICS! so awesome.

Also....space drill!

Dragon Age: Inquisition. As Knight-Enchanter.

- Empress Celene lived
- Templar allies
- Warden allies
- Viviene as the new Divine

It was interesting how the ending credit changed the view of certain aspects of the lore. Although I am unsure, if I want to play it again. Might buy Divinity: Original Sin or Pillars of Eternity for next.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

That kind of always confused me. I've known at least a couple girls that actually enjoyed 'The Witcher' and it just doesn't seem like they're the target audience. I'm not saying people can't enjoy what they love as some love their 'ponies' but it just feels strange to me. Mostly it's the fact that Geralt is kind of a man-***** and pretty much bangs any and every woman. I suppose they could enjoy it from the female perspective but Geralt (a dude that looks like a necromancer/corpse with cat eyes) doesn't exactly seem like the most exciting sexual partner unless you're into having sex with dead bodies and/or are a twilight fan in which case you may want to seek help.

The Witcher isn't about sex. Not in the slightiest. It's a leftover from the first game that had the stupid card idea and people who reduce the game down to this just don't know much about the game. The first game's combat was bad, the sex cards were bad, the crafting was way too cumbersome, but it was the best RPG story-wise, by a huge shot, until The Witcher 2. It was a RPG that had actual /decisions/ that /mattered/, not that Bioware crap.

For my wife - she enjoys RPGs and doesn't care about the character's gender. Geralt doesn't bang anyone in sight, but he doesn't turn down any offer either. Why would he? He's a man and on top of that, he's sterile and immune to most diseases. Riskless sex, yes please. He's tall, handsome, has a deep voice and is a strong man...so...I don't see how women wouldn't be attracted to him, in the contrary. As stated before, she plays games because of characters / stories and Witcher excels at those.

Bonus points for me alos enjoying the game

World of Warships. FAR too much World of Warships. There's some stuff I wanted to do over the weekend but I failed because ... World of Warships.

I haven't been so addicted to a game in a looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

That kind of always confused me. I've known at least a couple girls that actually enjoyed 'The Witcher' and it just doesn't seem like they're the target audience. I'm not saying people can't enjoy what they love as some love their 'ponies' but it just feels strange to me. Mostly it's the fact that Geralt is kind of a man-***** and pretty much bangs any and every woman. I suppose they could enjoy it from the female perspective but Geralt (a dude that looks like a necromancer/corpse with cat eyes) doesn't exactly seem like the most exciting sexual partner unless you're into having sex with dead bodies and/or are a twilight fan in which case you may want to seek help.

The Witcher isn't about sex. Not in the slightiest. It's a leftover from the first game that had the stupid card idea and people who reduce the game down to this just don't know much about the game. The first game's combat was bad, the sex cards were bad, the crafting was way too cumbersome, but it was the best RPG story-wise, by a huge shot, until The Witcher 2. It was a RPG that had actual /decisions/ that /mattered/, not that Bioware crap.

For my wife - she enjoys RPGs and doesn't care about the character's gender. Geralt doesn't bang anyone in sight, but he doesn't turn down any offer either. Why would he? He's a man and on top of that, he's sterile and immune to most diseases. Riskless sex, yes please. He's tall, handsome, has a deep voice and is a strong man...so...I don't see how women wouldn't be attracted to him, in the contrary. As stated before, she plays games because of characters / stories and Witcher excels at those.

Bonus points for me alos enjoying the game

I'm very much looking forward to playing The Witcher 3, and plan on going all-out Nilfgaard (huzzah, huzzah!)

Meanwhile, I'm playing Sunset Overdrive - quite enjoying it so far.