Duck and Cover

Installing Europa Universalis III Chronicles I'm excited, since CKII was the fist Paradox game I got into. Now I want something with more scope!

Why is everyone playing Civ5 and EU3, did something come out for them recently?

EUIII has always been fun. Civ5 recently got an expansion pack which apparently fixed a lot of problems with the original game.

Never liked neither EU3 nor Civ5. All Crusader Kings, Alpha Centauri & Hearts of Iron for me, babe.

Did the expansion revert Civ5 to Civ 2, 3 or 4? No? Still broken then I guess!

Any tips for EU3? I started as Aragon, and got steamrolled by Castille.

Started a new game with Portugal, set in 1492, and been busy colonizing the New World, but I'm afraid I'm missing something.

S4ur0n27 wrote:Did the expansion revert Civ5 to Civ 2, 3 or 4? No? Still broken then I guess!

Any tips for EU3? I started as Aragon, and got steamrolled by Castille.

Started a new game with Portugal, set in 1492, and been busy colonizing the New World, but I'm afraid I'm missing something.

I believe this is what you're missing my friend.

I got in to the Mechwarrior Online beta a few days ago, and I've been playing the hell out of that. I love my little commando, zipping around and throwing PPC blasts up atlas' tailpipes.

I'm caught by the DayZ virus. Playing with two friends (a lie, I dont have friends) and it is really addictive and the gun battles are quick and tense.

Found out Silent Storm is on Good Old Games and its got a fix to play it on modern computers.

Today is a good day.

Does it do anything related to having enemy turns lasting up to half an hour or the ludicrous gfx requirements or was it that the game didn't run on Win 7 and this just fixes it?

~

Tried out the Telltale Walking Dead episodes and am almost embarassed to say I liked them, all things considered. Mainly that there's just not a lot of game in there; it's kinda like Blargh's fabled "no-action-bits" Alpratocol.

Much better than the TV show, but then that wasn't very hard, made possible solely by the absence of absolute cunts. It's also better at getting you to go OSHITFUCK! than the comics, if you're willing to go with it. Which may take some effort- after all, there's only so much zombie-related rot one person can take.

About the only criticisms I care to level at TT's take on The Walking Dead is the rather contrived dichotomy regarding the tension/disagreement between Larry/Kenny in episode 1 and Lilly/Kenny in episode 2. The former, due to the odd design conceit that attempting to reason with Larry is counted as taking his side. The latter, I feel, is worse. To whit, while it is plausible that Lilly wouldn't be especially invested in preventing Lee from getting a face full of electric fence if she saw him as complicit in the outright murder of her father, it boggles the mind that not aiding Kenny in pulverising Larry's skull would leave him an abject, gibbering coward - even though he should still be capable of realising that his odds of saving his wife and twit of a son, nevermind his own survival, would only be substantially reduced (as usual, the protagonist is the sole bastion of occasional competence) by Lee's death.

Tied into this is the frequently referenced personality clash/leadership dispute between Kenny and Lilly, and at no point (that I've encountered) do you have the opportunity to express that they're both horribly unsuited due to their understandable family-before-anyone-or-anything-else ethos and (less tolerable) general fuckheadedness. No, but thou must take sides. But thou must setpieces.

Also, horribly telegraphed cannibalism. FYI - if, during a zombie cataclysm, you ever meet someone who is :

Alive.
A stranger.
Not trying to kill you.
Amicable.
Offering you food/shelter without question of recompense.

You'd do well to kill them while they're still trying to ingratiate themselves to you. Engaging in friendly blather to conceal a sinister ulterior motive counts as being flat-footed. Trust me, I looked it up.

The heavy handedness is, however, mildly redeemed by the soylent greenesque option leading to Clementine (a child character who is only mildly irritating, gosh !) not grokking Lee's enviable pop culture savviness and partaking of Mark's meaty thighs (how dare he take precious, limited food and then be mortally mutilated !?) regardless. Ha.

Though once you do manage to get through to the group, they all just sit there like morons and seemingly wait to be captured.

Doubt there will ever be an option to part ways with them. What a shame.

Oh, spoilers.

Also, the controls are occasionally imprecise. Most egregiously, though, you. Cannot. Skip. Dialogue. Or. Cutscenes.

Why do developers continue to implement this ? Why must they be so obtuse and/or vainglorious ?

That said (and excusing the incoming pleonasm), it's entertaining and it's not Telltale's Jurassic Park/The Walking Dead Teevee show (I blame Mad Men).

Just cracking into my new Steam Summer Sale purchases. I'm playing through Doom 3 again, this time with expansion. Never played the expansion before. I guess they're coming out with a "hi-res" version called Doom 3 BFG Edition or something this fall, but you can just download some of the awesome hi-res texture packs/mods and mod your game for higher screen resolutions and you pretty much get what they're going to charge more money for in the fall.

Oh, right. There's that too.

But thou must setpieces.

Well, you should probably consider that being logical and nominating Lee as pack leader would either- a) Prevent a lot of future shenanigans because COMMON SENSE, therefore killing the script; or b) giving the player "leader" options like "No, I wouldn't like to visit your your dairy and mend your swing!" would create bigger story branching than TT are equipped to deal with.

But you're not wrong. No, sir-ee. And now that you mention it, there's:

-The somewhat unwarranted shock reaction from what's fast becoming your female posse, seconds after witnessing lapidation overkill, when seeing you drive a pitchfork through Mr. Deliverance #2. Oh come on. That douche just made me die like 6 times in a row (thanks, Kenny!) because I couldn't find the rifle hotspot, and you're telling me I can't have sweet revenge without "losing my humanity"? Fine. *Mutley grumble*

-Choice in who lives so far either doesn't work (Duck) or seems to create a 2nd tier character (fatguy/reporter) that feels like it could be played by either survivor.

a child character who is only mildly irritating, gosh !

Inorite? I didn't even mind Duck, if I'm being honest, and considering how aggravating kids are <strike>in games</strike>, that's an accomplishment worthy of major something.

But I quite enjoyed myself. Heck, I'd even considered playing through it again, but then-

you. Cannot. Skip. Dialogue.

*sigh* You lousy fucktards.

Itchy Brain Vein wrote:branching

That's the crux of it. They can't/won't allow the player to have meaningful agency, the chance to be proactive rather than reactive. As evidenced by the overwhelming paucity of actual consequence at any point, i.e : the functionally identical characters of Doug and Carly (who will probably die in functionally indentical and unavoidable circumstances).

Which leaves the whole thing a rather shallow experience. I now better understand the batshitery of David 'no, you must play Heavy Rain only once, retention of profundity in the liver is always lethal' Cage. And I feel dirty. So dirty.

Rink Spatula wrote:lapidation

Yes, it was strange to completely ignore that detail. Similarly so when zealously, reasonably, redistributing the other brother's cranial configuration, and one of the gaggle of wankers tells Lee Enough. Enough ? I only directed Lee to batter to death a conniving prick who would have, if not for Lee's indefatigable protagonism and consistent lack of better options, imprisoned and systematically eaten every last one of them. Including The Children.

Later on, before the loot car/loot Choice, if you direct Lee to not lie unconvincingly, and inform Clementine that the entire family were chunts worthy of the undoubtedly karmic demise of joining the mouldering horde (possibly by the teeth of their own mother), and that she shouldn't feel any pangs of remorse ; you're slapped on the proverbial wrist for not sugar coating an obvious fiction to a child we've been previously informed is oh so clever, capable and not at all inclined to blindly accept the words of adults ? Particularly Lee, who is resoundingly hopeless at deceit.

OH I'M SURE THEY'RE JUST FINE LITTLE GIRL AND YOU KNOW WHAT, I ALSO THINK THEY'VE LEARNED AN IMPORTANT LESSON AND DECIDED TO FORSWEAR THEIR NAUGHTY CANNIBALISTIC WAYS AND CONVERT THEIR DAIRY INTO A SHELTER FOR ORPHANED PANDAS

'Wilson' wrote:(Duck)

Indeed. While it was a realistic response, it probably wasn't their intent that I found it amusing being bitched at by Katja for not assuming that Kenny would be right behind Lee (if only because he's not deaf), and keen to prioritise the extraction of their child, leaving Lee to move the tractor and save someone <strike>less irritating/accident prone</strike> useful.

I suppose the Word came from Kirkman that no one would be interfering with canon ? Bah.

The Devil's Toupee wrote:aggravating

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Duck isn't just profoundly thick, but mildly autistic as well. Either way, I remain disappointed by the children invincibility clause of game design and the signs that they probably won't be shrugging it off in the future.

I'm surprised more people on DaC haven't said more about Spec Ops: The Line. I figured the plot would be right up everyone's alley.

Prompted by a certain flash game of a logical nature, I shall endeavour to post this in a similar fashion, hence:

IF

Blargh wrote:obtuse and/or vainglorious

AND

Blargh 2.0 wrote:profundity in the liver

THEREFORE

'Wilson' wrote:we must have bald canadiens in our Telltale

ALSO

Everyone everywhere ever wrote:god damn it

And that's enough of posting like that. It was a silly idea.

loot car/loot Choice

Oh you mean the part where, in the middle of the night, our ship of fools happens upon a working car stuffed to the brim with goodies in the middle of a road where the troupe knows bandits operate, and not only there's no option to go WELL FUCK, THAT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A TRAP AT ALL!, but then it turns into not-a-trap, just another bit of these game-exclusive opportunities to enact the "to be rewarded", all-purpose good-christian selflessness / 16th-century-Japan notion of honour? In a survival game?? AND HE DOESN'T EVEN TAKE THE FUCKING SWEATER?

destitute by choice wrote:ORPHANED PANDAS

Although praising misanthropic teens isn't really my MO, I had to make an exception there. Surely you could get paid for this? What am I saying, you probably already are.

misanthropic indeed wrote:children invincibility clause

I take that back, any gaming journalism professional (HA! Take a shot!) oughta know about Game Designers' Happy Hippo-tic Oath. For shame.

And to think all of this started with "quite liked them" and "About the only criticisms I care to level at TT"... Truly, web forums are the Devil's own handiwork.

Am I wrong, or does Spec Ops : the Line resemble an unabashed homage to Heart of Darkness/Call of Duty X ?

EDUCATE ME.

Or don't.

IF Horribly Wrong About Certain Fundamentals THEN Kill wrote:logical

Oh, oh, does this mean I can have you fatally gassed ?

Red Headed Hippogryph wrote:Hippo

I simply concluded that the genre of don't-be-eaten-by-the-zombies is arguably one of the worst suited to the presence of unassailable characters. To know that any one character will always survive, no matter your circumstances or choices, destroys tension in a far more effective manner than their absence from the narrative, be they children, an author insert or some other shade of literary catastrophy.

So I suppose what I'm suggesting is, that with the reasonable assumption of this particular tenet of Modern Game Design being in full and lasting effect - that the first order of business should have been handing Clementine the claw hammer and instructing her to clean house/street/pharmacy/motel/dairy/In The Future. Secondly, weaponising Duck in some fashion, perhaps by attaching saw blades or railroad spikes to his head. It is, after all, rewarding to redeem the useless.

Oh, no, wait, that wouldn't work, as Lee is permitted the following paths at any given point :

The Worst Possible Option (i.e - ignoring obvious traps, ignoring ominous, unambiguous details, not introducing Larry to the fireaxe in the wake of a certain punched-out-and-left-for-the-thinly-veiled-allegory-for-modern-consumerism/not being able to express why he tried to save Larry's miserable life other than three flavours of YOU MURDERER and apathetic silence, not leaving the bloody group, et fucking al)

. . .

No, you see, that was the joke, because you don't get to do anything else.

American MENSA Spokesperson wrote:Devil's

It's an inevitability when you combine the facts that it can be replayed and that the players can discuss their wildly divergent experiences with others, with Internet and allow it to stew in the vile secretions of overthinking and unrealistic standards of quality.

Also, I'm fairly confident that likening someone to Sterling is to 'Games Journalism' as comparisons of Nazis are to practically any politically minded debate.

Except genuinely scathing. SCATHING.

Or have I completely misread this muddy quip of yours ?

Blargh wrote:muddy quip

No, you have not. Frankly, I find it outright appaling that a well-educated gentlecunt such as yourself has never come upon that old british (or fake, wannabe british) sarcastic notion of "Praise thy enemies; Insult thy friends and family" at one point or another. Hence the comparison to this rather foul excretion, which I already assumed you'd hate:

And for good reason.

Wait, you didn't actually mean those "cunts" we shared (erm), did you? Oh noes! ¡MI CORAZON ES ROTO! ¡¿Tiene que ser broma!? /telenovela

I'd thought you'd pick up on the drinking game I'd fashioned where you take a shot every time someone implies a games journalist is in any way virtuous. And you wanted me to have likened you to one that's actually good? (bottoms up!) Un-bloody-likely. Say what you will, at least those Nazis were good at being Nazis.
Although I admire your resilience in playing through the amount of shit you do without getting paid for it. You probably should have a doctor look at that, mind.

But your caps lock tirade did genuinely make me laugh. As did wanting to fashion the kids into DYI weaponry / construction workers / Zoey and Francis. I'd swear Scout's Honour but if there's one thing worse than kids, it's kids dressed like retards led by retards dressed as kids.

PS/1 wrote:you don't get to do anything else

And there you have it, boys and girls, like a brass chainpost being smashed into the cold marble floor of an otherwise silent library. Fatalism? Ha! Call it the noisy realisation that:
A.) Games enthusiasts make better games writers / designers than games writers / designers, or would if they weren't too busy getting shitfaced and wallowing in faux underachiever contempt (or doing whatever it is you spambots do for fun, posting ads on somethingawful or something);
B.) The internet is more fun than the games you're paying for, and it's free*;
C.) We've just managed (well, I did anyway, all Blargh does is take credit for other people's work) to turn a reasonable game into a Cover-story, 9.5 Sean Beans /10 (half a Bean deduced for invincible children)-scoring, Game of the Year. (or at least thaught some dirty lurker how to make one, seriously, fuck you). Hurrah for us.

PS- No you don't get to gas me, you tit. IF the subject of that sentence doesn't change THEN I'm the one that's supposed to kill. You meant "IF Horribly Wrong About Certain Fundamentals THEN Die". Unless you're owning to a mistake but we both know there's a fat chance of that ever happening. Regardless, I have no idea what you're on about but that's the case most of the time and we still manage to get along like fish in a barrel. Like we're about to be shot.

~~

Oh, and this is good. Yes. Very good. Clive Owen-good, in fact.

Rampant Faux-Quetzalcoatl wrote:appaling

Oh, I have. However, I simply cannot fathom how Sterling, of all beings, could be the subject of japes of such a malodourous, base fashion. :snuffbox:

Veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep wrote:noes!

I'm finding this patently unconvincing regarding the whole who-kills-who-with-gas gradient. FYI.

Pox Monger wrote:drinking

Ah, a three horse race between Profundity and cirrhosis. I imagine the latter is more merciful.

Audio Tape #51 - Dog in a Vacuum wrote:virtuous

Impossible.

OH.

Barbed Wire Kayak wrote:wanted

Presumption of intent ? Now you have hit upon something that genuinely irritates me. Congratulations on this undoubtedly fascinating detail !

Letch Seizure wrote:Nazis

Not good enough to still be Nazis, and believe me, that possibility was in the cards.

Moss Awareness Percentile wrote:resilience

Ahahahaha.

Arse Superior wrote:tit

Propositional calculus isn't Calvinball. You cunt.

Ten Feet Above the Ground wrote:good

Surprisingly decent voicework.

The Stanley Parable was a fun mod, I'm looking forward to their new version.