Oct 11th 2008 5:42AM kentucky: No kidding, they have some real pedigree in there. Even Warren Ellis did some of the early plot brainstorming for them. And that's the best time to have Warren Ellis working on something, because the man's an absolutely fantastic idea-man, but not so great on fleshing them out. I'm glad they left that to someone else, and in doing so it was just one of the factors that helped them create a fantastic plot.
I tend to go on and on about how people could learn from the way the Dead Space devs put their plot together, but that's only because it's true. When one looks at videogames, unless one is looking at RPGs (such as Mask of the Betrayer, which I loved dearly) one can't exactly expect even a half-decent plot. But these guys did it right, this is leading up to be the best horror story I've seen in a long while.
Oct 11th 2008 12:04AM Raptortim: That's only true when the original game isn't so poor that the developers would actually be hard pressed to actually make it worse (see Yahtzee's review on Zero Punctuation to see what I mean). If they manage to make it worse than the previous versions then it's going to be a whole new level of incompetence. I mean, really... they can only go up from what they're porting from.
bishop: Even considering what I've said there though, I still think Dead Space is probably going to be the better title. It looks like it has a better plot overall, and that's important. I've loved watching the Dead Space comics, and they've really shown that the people behind Dead Space can write a story. Alone in the Dark, adversely, had a pretty poor story and that's the one thing that's likely not going to change at all in the port.
Aug 29th 2008 5:50PM I've played Warcraft before, and I recently got back into it and quickly got tired of it again. I started with my roomie, but I made a choice of class/spec that wasn't popular. This meant that while his resto Shaman was getting instance invites left and right, my character was left out in the cold. There just weren't enough groups going for people to have a slot for my character, and this was totally different to what I remembered when I played back between 1.5-1.8, the pacing of the game and the general feel of the game was better then.
What I feel would fix it is if there were some kind of mentoring system, so that if someone got ahead of me I could actually use them as a mentor similar to City of Heroes. For example: A level 45 could take a level 70 mentor and get the full level 70 spec, they could then quickly allot talent points and sort out their bars (mods could be created for making this quicker) and jump in. As for the ever important question of armour and weapons, a "summoned" set could be provided which would be perfectly adequate for the instance. Now already I can hear the cries of "OMG no! The armour and weapons I spent my life (24/7!!!) getting will be utterly pointless!!!!", but that need not be so. The summoned armour could be cookie-cutter, it'd be enough for the person to contribute there but it would have the individual optimisation that a grinded armour set would.
How this could work is that those players could then roll for new armour and if they win, they'd still be able to get BoP items, but they wouldn't actually be able to use them until they were 70 or unless they were mentored up to the level that's required by the armour. So they could stash the armour in their bank and leave it there until they could use it.
What this would mean is that people could run instances that were a few levels ahead of them, and they could get items in time for when they hit that level. This would work in-step with Warcraft's current increased-experience system.
The thing is though, this is Warcraft and having such a system might take away from people having to spend their lives (aswell as their money) on the game, so I doubt Blizzard would implement such a thing. But if they did I think numerous players (including myself) would be more inclined to consider a game like Warcraft again as opposed to a new game (like Warhammer) where they'll actually be able to contribute at any level, as opposed to only end-game after months of reputation grinding.
Aug 26th 2008 1:47PM "PS. It looks better because it borrowed a lot from WoW!"
Guards, swap him. Vewy woughly!
That joke is so passé these days, just because everyone knows that Warcraft completely ripped off its appearance from Warhammer art/figurines doesn't mean it's funny or clever to claim that the reverse is true for the bazillionth time. It's no different than a Chuck Norris joke, and thus really very imbecilic.
I'm all for being funny but seriously... try harder.
Aug 22nd 2008 9:51AM Re: A Dwarf Jedi's Claims
Well, what you say might be true if you overlook the fact that there are a number of pointers that say that the Dwarves went a little further than "burning down their village", I'd even go so far as to say that were they not too drunk to competently have achieved the task, they would've engaged in full-scale genocide. Not to mention that you're overlooking what might have happened before they burned down the village, it isn't like the Tauren were the aggressors there, is it?
Let's step away from that for a moment and also examine the fact that the Taurens are also really quite old, quite old indeed. I won't do all your research for you, but considering what's happened over the history of Azeroth, the Earthen abandoned that land and the Taurens came to have as much claim to it (by merit of time occupying it) as the Earthen did, and possibly more so. They thought of it as their ancestral homeland too.
From my perspective; a bunch of imperialistic Dwarves tippity-topped up on their favourite poison decided that slaughtering some monsters who seemed to have pitched tent near where their ancestors once had an outpost eons ago would be a laugh, and wouldn't matter much to anyone. This involved the killing of innocents too, women and children, and without so much as a by-your-leave or any guilt felt. (And considering Nessingwary, is this particular vision of the everyday Dwarf that hard to see?)
Once again, from my perspective, the Dwarves are imperialistic little terrors and the real monsters in this tale. Righteous actions? Those Dwarves? Aha... hahahahaha... hahaha... ha... heh... no. Just no. That's not a credible claim, not even in (to paraphrase Comic Book Guy) Bizarro Azeroth.
Anyway, here's some reading, if it interests you and you care to take notice:
I'll further go on to point out that the Dwarves had to dig to find those ruins, so it couldn't be known to the Tauren that their choice of location wasn't exactly the best place to set up shop. Furthermore, considering the location of Bloodhoof and Camp Taurajo, it would be sensible to think (and fairly obvious to realise) that the next sensible option for expansion was where they set up camp.
They'd been hunting in the Barrens for generations, and they set up a camp on a spot of land not too far away from Camp Taurajo. There were no visible ruins there at that time, and as far as they could understand the situation they were the first to settle the area.
Just to drive the nail into the coffin that little bit further, Gann pointed out that the Tauren had tried to engage in the honourable act of diplomacy with the Dwarves, and it was that effort of trying to talk with them and reach an agreement that lead to the Dwarves greedily siezing the land by force, commiting murder aplenty in the process.
The general consensus here was; "Why bother considering any kind of mutually beneficial agreement when you have militaristic superiority, amirite?"
I can't believe that anyone still tries to defend the Dwarves these days when it comes to this. This was a heinous act, and every race has their share of heinous acts (Cairne's Tauren have the Grimtotem to contend with). This was one of the really nice, meaty little ones that belonged to the Dwarves. Don't take it away from them, you'll insult their imperialistic pride by tarnishing their glory.
Jul 15th 2008 2:06PM Gah, typo there. No instances of evil only in the Horde, when there are plenty of examples of just the opposite.
Jul 15th 2008 2:02PM I'm sure this'll cause no small amount of... how is it put? QQ? Yes, I'm sure this'll cause an amount of that, but my experiences were the reverse.
The Alliance had a generally uninteresting storyline, for me. Whereas Thrall's struggle to gain respect for the new Horde, and finally rediscovering the Orcs that once were (the Mag'har), were enthralling to me.
Also, I found a number of Alliance quests imperialistic, militaristic, self-obsessed, and outright xenophobic. To me that's pretty evil in and of itself. Please don't try to tell me there's no evil in the Horde, when there are so many examples of just that. My favourite being that the Dwarves engaged in the wholesale slaughter of a bunch of tree-hugging, tribal Tauren just because they were "annoying" and they wanted to make a digsite there.
There are only three races I feel I can play realistically as a good guy, without feeling as though I'm deluding myself.
The Taurens: The kin of Cairne are natural tree-huggers and believe in pacifistic approaches (note, kin of Cairne, not Magatha).
The Orcs: They've been evil, they know what it's like. Now they struggle to leave a mark on the World that says they can create something, instead of merely being known as a force of destruction.
The Trolls: The Orcs saved 'em, and now some of them are doing their best to follow the examples set down by the Orcs and the Tauren. There's some evil there, to be sure, but they're making an effort.
Beyond that, the rest of the races pretty much practice grandiose levels of hypocrisy. You can't do evil on the one hand, do good on the other, and claim that you're purely a force of righteousness just because you're good at brushing things under the mat, or denying that your darker side exists.