Tali'Thread vas Clan Zorah nar BSN 6.0

[Dragaros]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/huge-cave-found-on-moon-could-house-astronauts-japan-scientists/ar-AAtIc76

Japan finds large cave on moon. May house future astronauts. Like 31 miles long, that's how large.

You know, now that you mention it, I never really considered building a space base underground. But logically, it makes way more sense...

We choose to build large, underground moon bases not because they are easy, but because they are hard; because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one we intend to win!

[Dragaros]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8R5f2kNo0A

[Dragaros]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJfeziEzSg4

[Dragaros]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdybGpUBg_c

[Dragaros]

Meanwhile, Age of Sigmar continues to be super lame, with the exceptions of the lizardmen and Nagash.

[Alienmorph]

You know, now that you mention it, I never really considered building a space base underground. But logically, it makes way more sense...

Many futurists and scientists have pointed out for years that it'd make much much more sense to make underground bases on places like Mars or the Moon... natural radiation shielding, holds atmosphere and heat much easier, and you don't have to worry about dem pesky meteorites. Makes all kind of senses, and doesn't prevent you from building domed areas on the surface and have some panoramic open spaces for recreation and stress-relief purposes.

Meanwhile, Age of Sigmar continues to be super lame, with the exceptions of the lizardmen and Nagash.

Well... it's pretty damn hard to fuck up dinosaur people riding dinosaurs.

[magnuskn]

So, I'm about 85-90% done with Shadow of War, I'm on act four (the allegedly grindy one which promotes lootboxes), on stage 7 of 10. Basically, that act is a bunch of fortress defenses, which if you lose a fortress you can simply conquer it back.

As a whole, the game is fantastic. I got over 70 hours played up until this point, which averages to about 7 hours played per day and I had fun for about 95% of that time, the un-fun times being when I tried to get an orc to get up to legendary status and it didn't work (it did the second time around I tried it).

The nemesis system is better than it was in Shadow of Mordor, where it already was the best feature of the game. The gameplay remains the same as in Shadow of Mordor, i.e. Batman Arkham combat + Assassins Creed climbing, with a ton of cool and useful special abilities, now all with their own modifiers you can additionally unlock. I will say that the climbing has become a little less precise than it used to in Shadow of Mordor, with me getting stuck on some ledges where the only option I had was to drop down and try another approach. Also, if you are in combat, there are times when you either start doing rolls before a wall, instead of climbing it or instead of jumping over an enemy you suddenly are climbing up a wall. But for the majority of time spent in the game, the controls work just fine.

The story is functional, given that the writers clearly tried to not introduce characters whose personality is out of place in the Tolkien universe. The result, though, is that all characters are very serious at all times, have no sense of humor to speak of and that drags down the story a bit. I take quite a lot of issue with this approach, since the movies had no problem introducing humor when it was appropiate. The exception are the orcs, which are funny as hell, in their orcish way. Many of the nemesis introductions are clearly played for laughs (like any orc named "the bard"). I think the rest of the story could have used a little bit of that, especially Talion, the main character.

So, how is the lootbox situation? You basically don't need them. Everything you want to get is obtainable through normal gameplay and easily so. The one exception I could think of is the legendary gear, where you need a legendary orc of a specific tribe and of a specific class to drop the piece you are interested in. Although legendary orcs are rare, there are about two or three you will normally get per zone and if you play a lot of Orcemon (i.e. you use the fighting pits as soon as you have conquered a region) you will see quite a few more turn up there.

So, if you want to get that specific legendary item, like I did in the endgame, you either can trust in RNGesus and start buying lootboxes or you get smart and farm a legendary orc during the shadow wars, i.e. the act four invasions of your fortresses. How do you do it? You wait until the tribe you want your legendary comes from attacks your fortress. Either the leader (who is always a legendary orc) is already of the class you need and then you just kill him in the last stage of the invasion (and if you do it smart, you can still lose after that and farm another legendary orc) or, if you need another class you let yourself get killed and then have to conquer back the fortress. One orc is the new overlord and if he isn't of the class you need, he needs to go. So, you choose one of his warchiefs who is the class you need, get killed a few times by that warchief and sooner rather than later, he duels his overlord, becomes the new overlord and thus legendary status. You kill him, get your fortress back, presto. Here's your legendary item for that four-set bonus you wanted. If for some reason the class you needed is not present in the conquered fortress, either get killed by an appropiate orc in the wilderness or insert an appropiate orc from your garrison, throw him out of your army, get killed by it a few times and it will become a warlord and eventually the overlord.

Ah, yes, the garrison. Well, I did get some lootboxes (about 30 of them so far, I'd say), but all but two of them were with the in-game currency, miriam, because it began stacking to absurd levels after a while. The other two I got from gold the game threw after me for completing some challenges and a weekly challenge which awarded one specific lootbox. The orcs you get from the boxes are put into your garrison, where you can deploy them into any region you own. I won't say that the contents aren't useful (especially the training orders, which give specific bonuses to your orcs and you can't get those in-game otherwise), but they aren't necessary to fully enjoy the game. I enjoy the game enough to want to try and build up one fortress with the most bad-ass orcs in Mordor, so those training orders will come handy in there. But you can get those from the silver lootboxes, which just require you getting some more in-game silver.

I think the only persons who are in danger of falling to the predatory charm of these specific lootboxes are persons with a severe gambling problem, especially since there are so many more addictive options out there everywhere else in the world. If "Oh my gawd, dem lootboxes!" is the reason you were not buying this game, I'd say you can rest easy and just ignore them. The game works fine and excellent without them.

Anyway, I give this game a 9 out of 10, with the one point missing for a full 10/10 being the futzy controls you get sometimes and the only functional story and characters. The game is incredible fun and I'm sure I'll do a full second play-through in a few months, after I got a bit of rest.

[Vol]

If I wasn't too lazy to make a frontpage, I'd post that review on it, magnus. Heh.

ASoIaF: I never noticed this detail, largely because dream/warg sequences bored me greatly in the past, but apparently Shaggydog kills a unicorn on Skagos, which confirms a couple things, in the later books.

[Mobius_118]

Well, it's official: I'm back in the Army. 12B, Combat Engineer, reserve status until I finish college and start a peace officer position.

Gonna learn to love the smell of detcord in the morning.

[SciFlyBoy]

Ah, detcord, that brings me back...What the hell is detcord?

[magnuskn]

If I wasn't too lazy to make a frontpage, I'd post that review on it, magnus. Heh.

Even if that would have been a possibility, I would have needed to restructure it for it to be a properly written review. :p

I notice as well that Jim Sterling and Total Biscuit have moved on to other punching bags, because this one actually did not pan out as they feared (or hoped, in the case of Jim Sterling, since he thrives on controversy journalism). YongYea and Pretty Good Gaming also are not mentioning the title anymore, but that was to be expected since their own outrage videos used exclusively selective information and if they continued that, people would (hopefully) call them out on their hipocrysy.

ASoIaF: I never noticed this detail, largely because dream/warg sequences bored me greatly in the past, but apparently Shaggydog kills a unicorn on Skagos, which confirms a couple things, in the later books.

Huh. I think I read the books about five times (although A Dance with Dragons only the once, because I was greatly disenchanted with the series by that time) and I never got that.

[TTTX]

Even if that would have been a possibility, I would have needed to restructure it for it to be a properly written review. :p

I notice as well that Jim Sterling and Total Biscuit have moved on to other punching bags, because this one actually did not pan out as they feared (or hoped, in the case of Jim Sterling, since he thrives on controversy journalism). YongYea and Pretty Good Gaming also are not mentioning the title anymore, but that was to be expected since their own outrage videos used exclusively selective information and if they continued that, people would (hopefully) call them out on their hipocrysy.

From what I gather Jim is still playing the game in order get all the info and that takes time and you know they are very busy men who have a lot of work and even some sickness to keep them busy so they can't focus completely on Shadow of war, they have to look at other games too, who also have lot boxes like Battlefront 2 (which is far worse then Shadow of war by the sound and looks of it).

As for YongYea, from what I understand, he isn't going to buy the game so he can't review it or give his thoughts on it now that it is out.

also they aren't hypercrits, from what I understand there is still a 20-40 hour grind fest without any story elements to keep you interested to defend your keeps at the end in order to get the true ending, it just didn't affect the game as much as people feared (which is a good thing) but the game still uses a good portion of itself to defend the castle for hours and hours with no story and such to keep players attention (and for what I understand there is no story reason for it).

While that may not be a problem for you who has more time then most on your hands and is already a hardcore fan, for a person who just want to play experience the story and such, it maybe kill the mood for some people playing when the story stops for some many hours in order to do the same thing over and over with some variation because of the nemesis system, from what I understand that part does seem a bit unnecessary since it doesn't serve the story at all other then goat some players into depart with some money (and while optional, not everyone have a lot of time and such play the game for like 70 or whatever it takes to do everything including the whole defend your keeps thing in order to get the true ending).

[magnuskn]

The shadow wars (the alleged grindfest) are there for people who enjoy the gameplay. I am having great fun doing the sieges and am happy that with the first paid DLC we will also get a free DLC for endless siege battles after the 20 from act four.

Batman: Arkham Knight had the same principle with a "true ending" unlocked when you got all the Riddler trophies, although that was far less enjoyable (for me) than what we have here. I got that cinematic from Youtube and everybody who just wanted the story can easily do the same after finishing act three.

I'll happily admit that the game is pretty bad in marking that the end of act three is the end of the main story. What should be done is mark the ending of the game after act three more clearly (i.e. run credits) and then open up act four, for the people who enjoy the gameplay of Shadow of War.

And, seriously, you don't need the loot boxes. I got a bunch of them for the in-game currency, just for shits and giggles and I think of the about 50-70 orcs I got out of them, I inserted three into the game, two in failed schemes to get myself a legendary orc of the class needed to get a certain legendary item and only one to reinforce an area where I did not have the classes I wanted (tanks and berserkers) to fortify my castle. Which I could have gotten in 5-10 minutes of gameplay, just by doing some arena battles or simply pressing "advance time" a few times and then finding and dominating the orc I wanted. I just felt lazy at that moment and had this dude sitting around in my garrison.

Sorry, but after the game has come out it is clear that the outcry of "OMG, loot boxes are needed, fuck you WB!" is activism and not based in reality. If you need to lie and/or use selective information to fortify your point, you can't be trusted and that is certainly what those Youtubers have been doing.

Oh, btw., I am an stage 8 of the shadow wars now (was only on stage 6 when I posted my review, my bad) and am level 59. After I finish stage 8, there'll be 7 siege battles to go at the max level of 60, so those will go much more rapidly. So far I mostly lost the fortress on purpose and then conquered it back, because its easier than a defense and you get a bit more XP out of it, but I'll enjoy the fortress defense as much as I can before the game is over. Although I may lose one or two on purpose, since the boss fight against the overlord at the end when you attack can be pretty damn epic, when he has the right immunities/rage triggers/lack of weaknesses.

[TTTX]

The shadow wars (the alleged grindfest) are there for people who enjoy the gameplay. I am having great fun doing the sieges and am happy that with the first paid DLC we will also get a free DLC for endless siege battles after the 20 from act four.

Batman: Arkham Knight had the same principle with a "true ending" unlocked when you got all the Riddler trophies, although that was far less enjoyable (for me) than what we have here. I got that cinematic from Youtube and everybody who just wanted the story can easily do the same after finishing act three.

I'll happily admit that the game is pretty bad in marking that the end of act three is the end of the main story. What should be done is mark the ending of the game after act three more clearly (i.e. run credits) and then open up act four, for the people who enjoy the gameplay of Shadow of War.

And, seriously, you don't need the loot boxes. I got a bunch of them for the in-game currency, just for shits and giggles and I think of the about 50-70 orcs I got out of them, I inserted three into the game, two in failed schemes to get myself a legendary orc of the class needed to get a certain legendary item and only one to reinforce an area where I did not have the classes I wanted (tanks and berserkers) to fortify my castle. Which I could have gotten in 5-10 minutes of gameplay, just by doing some arena battles or simply pressing "advance time" a few times and then finding and dominating the orc I wanted. I just felt lazy at that moment and had this dude sitting around in my garrison.

Sorry, but after the game has come out it is clear that the outcry of "OMG, loot boxes are needed, fuck you WB!" is activism and not based in reality. If you need to lie and/or use selective information to fortify your point, you can't be trusted and that is certainly what those Youtubers have been doing.

well suck for the people who don't like just gameplay only, huh. Although it seems that whole issue could resolved if they had just put the whole siege thing as the post game content, that people who enjoy the gameplay as much as you could play to your hearts content.

Batman: Arkham Knight also needed you to solved all the side missions with story content and again you get a little story as you get more Riddler trophies and not to mention a boss fight to cap it off, so it's not the same as Shadow of war, where it's basically go and defend these keeps for hours and eventually you get a cut scene.

if you don't need them, then they shouldn't be part of the singleplayer experience of the game to begin with.

says the guy, who is already a hardcore fan and already loves the gameplay to death even before the game came out, I wouldn't exactly say you are unbiased either.

Just for the record I don't hate the game (I'm waiting for price cut in order to buy it myself, as money is rather tight), I just don't like lotboxes in singleplayer and have game go full stop on the story and basically lure the people who don't have the energy and patience to make sure your orcs can defend your keeps from the evil forces from takning them from you, so yeah I'm not unbiased either.

[TTTX]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzrr08ARq2I&index=13&list=WL

[magnuskn]

well suck for the people who don't like just gameplay only, huh.

Yeah, that's kinda the case with, y'know, any game? I can't tell you the number of games I bought on a steam sale on the principle of "let's check out if this is as interesting as it looks" and the answer then was "nope", after which I uninstalled the game and forgot about it. You can't lay this problem at the feet of this particular game.

Although it seems that whole issue could resolved if they had just put the whole siege thing as the post game content, that people who enjoy the gameplay as much as you could play to your hearts content.

As I said, they did, only they didn't mark it clearly that the main story was finished.

Batman: Arkham Knight also needed you to solved all the side missions with story content and again you get a little story as you get more Riddler trophies and not to mention a boss fight to cap it off, so it's not the same as Shadow of war, where it's basically go and defend these keeps for hours and eventually you get a cut scene.

It actually is exactly the same, as solving all the riddler trophies is fucking busywork in Arkham Knight, which is why I didn't do it and just recurred to Youtube for that slightly different ending. And I did all the Riddler stuff in Asylum and City.

if you don't need them, then they shouldn't be part of the singleplayer experience of the game to begin with.

Sure, but they are there but don't change the game. All things considered, I think that intentionally writing bad reviews and badmouthing the game because you don't like lootboxes is unprincipled hipocrisy.

says the guy, who is already a hardcore fan and already loves the gameplay to death even before the game came out, I wouldn't exactly say you are unbiased either.

Yes. But I don't use selective information to make my points, I use the actual facts which exist. I got my little problems with the game, which I mentioned in my review. The lootboxes in this particular game are not a problem, but a lot of people hate the principle of them so much that they are willing to use selective facts or even false facts to try to make this game fail. And don't misunderstand me, if they are there to give you an actual advantage in a multiplayer game, I'm right there with you in denouncing them.

Joe did this also a bit with his opening skit in the review linked above, where he makes it out as if the game is shoving the lootboxes in your face all the time, when this is definitely not the case. His "market" tab was only lit because either he a.) still had the pre-order bonus loot boxes unopened or b.) he bought some himself. The game does not throw constants adverts at you, unless you just looooove to hang out in the main menu and stare at the messages scrolling through there. I'm quite disappointed in him making such a misleading intro, even if it was just a comedic skit. Then again, he gives the game a 7/10 and clearly does so because he also wants to discourage more microtransactions in the future. Which I personally think is unfair to the game itself.

Just for the record I don't hate the game (I'm waiting for price cut in order to buy it myself, as money is rather tight), I just don't like lotboxes in singleplayer and have game go full stop on the story and basically lure the people who don't have the energy and patience to make sure your orcs can defend your keeps from the evil forces from takning them from you, so yeah I'm not unbiased either.

Okay, let's clarify this point for once: You get orcs in the "natural" way of dominating them throughout the entire story. When act four hits, you can easily level them up in the arena (a bit slow with 3-4 levels per fight which lasts up to 3 minutes (mostly 1-2 minutes), also with the risk they might get killed, but it gives silver for the items you can disenchant) or just by sending them on missions (faster leveling, you can help them out, takes a bit longer per mission than arena fights due to traveling time). Yes, it is a bit grindy, but that also was the case with the Riddler trophies in Arkham Knight. This may not be for everyone, but since when has "putting in effort" been a reason for people to hate on a game? If you put in some time, you get good results, as with every game there is.

[Dragaros]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCt9rfbBiRM

[Dragaros]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZR0c1jqrjs

[Dragaros]

[Dragaros]

[TTTX]

Yeah, that's kinda the case with, y'know, any game? I can't tell you the number of games I bought on a steam sale on the principle of "let's check out if this is as interesting as it looks" and the answer then was "nope", after which I uninstalled the game and forgot about it. You can't lay this problem at the feet of this particular game.

I can lay this problem on it's feet when it stops it's own story completely and then forces you to do these 20 sieges in order to get the final cutscene.

As I said, they did, only they didn't mark it clearly that the main story was finished.

well aside from the final cutscene.

It actually is exactly the same, as solving all the riddler trophies is fucking busywork in Arkham Knight, which is why I didn't do it and just recurred to Youtube for that slightly different ending. And I did all the Riddler stuff in Asylum and City.

no it's not, Shadow of war asks you to do the excat same thing 20 times, Arkham knight asks you to do stuff with the Penguin, Two face, serie murder mystery, the Riddler (who's trophies have always been busy work as you call it) and so on which is a lot more then just defend your keeps 20 times.

Sure, but they are there but don't change the game. All things considered, I think that intentionally writing bad reviews and badmouthing the game because you don't like lootboxes is unprincipled hipocrisy.

if I was a game reviewer who are suppose to judge games as they are or make people to buy a game similar to Shadow of war with lotboxes in it's signleplayer then yes it would be hypocrisy.
but then again you could say that by a lot of other games it also have happened to, like ME:A which was a mediocre game by BW, but got so bad mouth reviews that it sounded like it was 1 off the worst games ever made, even though a lot of it's faults is something that other games and even some of the story problems already existed in the original ME trilogy.

Yes. But I don't use selective information to make my points, I use the actual facts which exist. I got my little problems with the game, which I mentioned in my review. The lootboxes in this particular game are not a problem, but a lot of people hate the principle of them so much that they are willing to use selective facts or even false facts to try to make this game fail. And don't misunderstand me, if they are there to give you an actual advantage in a multiplayer game, I'm right there with you in denouncing them.

Joe did this also a bit with his opening skit in the review linked above, where he makes it out as if the game is shoving the lootboxes in your face all the time, when this is definitely not the case. His "market" tab was only lit because either he a.) still had the pre-order bonus loot boxes unopened or b.) he bought some himself. The game does not throw constants adverts at you, unless you just looooove to hang out in the main menu and stare at the messages scrolling through there. I'm quite disappointed in him making such a misleading intro, even if it was just a comedic skit. Then again, he gives the game a 7/10 and clearly does so because he also wants to discourage more microtransactions in the future. Which I personally think is unfair to the game itself.

Well considering how video game companies have no problem lying and getting greedier as time goes on, it's not how to see why gamers and the like are using propaganda which is basically a fancy word for lying (which is one of the reasons on how to win a war by make the other side look more like a monster). It's not right, but on the other hand if they don't do it well the gaming future might become very grim.

Shadow of war is just one of those games that got caught in the line of fire, but then again one of the reasons we got DLC basically started with horse armor DLC in Elder scrolls Oblivion and look were we are now.

But it doesn't look like Shadow of war is suffering much when it comes to the reviews.

Okay, let's clarify this point for once: You get orcs in the "natural" way of dominating them throughout the entire story. When act four hits, you can easily level them up in the arena (a bit slow with 3-4 levels per fight which lasts up to 3 minutes (mostly 1-2 minutes), also with the risk they might get killed, but it gives silver for the items you can disenchant) or just by sending them on missions (faster leveling, you can help them out, takes a bit longer per mission than arena fights due to traveling time). Yes, it is a bit grindy, but that also was the case with the Riddler trophies in Arkham Knight. This may not be for everyone, but since when has "putting in effort" been a reason for people to hate on a game? If you put in some time, you get good results, as with every game there is.

Arkham knight's ending was rather anticlimactic even the extended one, but the game did "end" (and I use the term losely) in both, Shadow of war on the other hand leaves the story on a lose note, before setting you out on the siege thing without giving you an reason to why this happens and then gives you the ending that gives you the final piece of the story.
Arkahm knight does give a somewhat reason as to why the Riddler trophies needs to be collected, it's basically to catch Riddler and put him in prison, because batman is a crazy person wearing a bat costume who has justice complex and misses his parents.
It's not much of a reason, but it is an in game universe reason.
Shadow of war it seems more like unnecessary padding to make the game longer before ending the story for real.

[magnuskn]

I can lay this problem on it's feet when it stops it's own story completely and then forces you to do these 20 sieges in order to get the final cutscene.

It doesn't force you to do jack shit. Youtube is a thing, you know?

well aside from the final cutscene.

Which is just an addendum to the end of the storyline. Once again, freely available on YouTube, no grind required if you don't like the gameplay for its sake.

no it's not, Shadow of war asks you to do the excat same thing 20 times, Arkham knight asks you to do stuff with the Penguin, Two face, serie murder mystery, the Riddler (who's trophies have always been busy work as you call it) and so on which is a lot more then just defend your keeps 20 times.

Personally I found the 12 sieges I've already done a lot more rewarding than the Riddler trophies. The other stuff you mentioned I did as a matter of course while doing the main storyline of Arkham Knight.

]if I was a game reviewer who are suppose to judge games as they are or make people to buy a game similar to Shadow of war with lotboxes in it's signleplayer then yes it would be hypocrisy.
but then again you could say that by a lot of other games it also have happened to, like ME:A which was a mediocre game by BW, but got so bad mouth reviews that it sounded like it was 1 off the worst games ever made, even though a lot of it's faults is something that other games and even some of the story problems already existed in the original ME trilogy.

People like Angry Joe live on their trustworthyness. When they start using selective information and false insinuations in their reviews, that puts them on the same level as any bought professional reviews you might point towards. ME:A had a lot of problems, which I enumerated in detail when I did my review of that game. It got the score and reputation it deserved, based on what was actually in the game.

Well considering how video game companies have no problem lying and getting greedier as time goes on, it's not how to see why gamers and the like are using propaganda which is basically a fancy word for lying (which is one of the reasons on how to win a war by make the other side look more like a monster). It's not right, but on the other hand if they don't do it well the gaming future might become very grim.

Because if you are not better than the side you are excoriating for terrible practices, then you have no moral leg to stand on. Worse, people who are looking in from the outside will assume that you are a lying piece of shit and thus won't feel obliged to help out when the situation becomes worse.

Shadow of war is just one of those games that got caught in the line of fire, but then again one of the reasons we got DLC basically started with horse armor DLC in Elder scrolls Oblivion and look were we are now.

The question then is "is additional paid for DLC bad in general?", only because it has been pre-announced? Would, for example, the two additional tribes for the nemesis system be in the game at all if there were no DLC? I would say "no", since the game seems to be feature complete. However, two storylines ended a bit inconclusively, so I guess they were laying the groundwork for the other two story DLC's.

But it doesn't look like Shadow of war is suffering much when it comes to the reviews.

Yes, because most reviewers looked at the game from a journalistically professional viewpoint, i.e. based on facts, not assumptions.

Arkham knight's ending was rather anticlimactic even the extended one, but the game did "end" (and I use the term losely) in both, Shadow of war on the other hand leaves the story on a lose note, before setting you out on the siege thing without giving you an reason to why this happens and then gives you the ending that gives you the final piece of the story.
Arkahm knight does give a somewhat reason as to why the Riddler trophies needs to be collected, it's basically to catch Riddler and put him in prison, because batman is a crazy person wearing a bat costume who has justice complex and misses his parents.
It's not much of a reason, but it is an in game universe reason.
Shadow of war it seems more like unnecessary padding to make the game longer before ending the story for real.

Shadow of War also ends on a definite note in act three. Act four just shows happening what was insinuated would happen with the main ending and then throws in a reward cutscene, which, again, you can easily view for free on Youtube. Please stop with the attitude that it is still a pre-Youtube era. If you got tired of the gameplay, there was every opportunity to throw in the towel and take the easy route. If you are compulsive obsessive enough to want to get the final cutscene in-game, well then it's effort = reward. Like in other beloved games, like Dark Souls, or so I heard.

[Vol]

Man, I get the pussiest colds. Yesterday, wake up, very mild sorethroat, clogged nose, general malaise. Make it through the work day (With a respirator on the whole time because I was working with oil paint). Today, more light malaise, runny nose. More obnoxious than anything. Bitch ass colds don't have the balls to go at me hard. It's almost insulting.

Well, it's official: I'm back in the Army. 12B, Combat Engineer, reserve status until I finish college and start a peace officer position.

Gonna learn to love the smell of detcord in the morning.

Well, well, well, just when you think you're out, they pull you back in. Carry on, soldier, carry on.

[Vol]

Huh. I think I read the books about five times (although A Dance with Dragons only the once, because I was greatly disenchanted with the series by that time) and I never got that.

I never noticed either, during one of Bran's dreams later on (I'm only up to Storm on this reread) and he goes into Shaggy who's taking down a goat with a long horn.

[Mazder]

So apparently NeoGaf's kinda been invaded.

[Dragaros]

[Dragaros]

[Dragaros]

http://www.avpgalaxy.net/literature/rev ... al-manual/

[Dragaros]

MVC Infinite concept art for DLC characters:

https://imgur.com/a/xpbHp#vgjJLDW

https://www.eventhubs.com/news/2017/sep ... -infinite/

► Show Spoiler

[Dragaros]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvQsRuEBHSc

[Dragaros]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGQELReWNmU

[TTTX]

It doesn't force you to do jack shit. Youtube is a thing, you know?

wrong, it forces me to stop playing the game and go to youtube to see the ending instead of earning it myself.

Which is just an addendum to the end of the storyline. Once again, freely available on YouTube, no grind required if you don't like the gameplay for its sake.

if video game company ever said something like that, a lot of people would be pissed.

Personally I found the 12 sieges I've already done a lot more rewarding than the Riddler trophies. The other stuff you mentioned I did as a matter of course while doing the main storyline of Arkham Knight.

you can do the same with a lot of the riddler trophies as the story goes a long hell that's what I did,
Shadow of war just says "do this now because I say so", it doesn't give the option before the act 4 begins to go out and do while the story goes along.

People like Angry Joe live on their trustworthyness. When they start using selective information and false insinuations in their reviews, that puts them on the same level as any bought professional reviews you might point towards. ME:A had a lot of problems, which I enumerated in detail when I did my review of that game. It got the score and reputation it deserved, based on what was actually in the game.

I still perfer that over reviewers who don't know what putting lotboxes in singleplayer can lead.
A lot of those problems have existed in the Elder scrolls games for well over a decade now and those games get praised to the sky and beyond, ME:A is mediocre game that got a lot of blame, because 1 it's BW game (there is a lot of different exceptions among other things) and 2 it's already had a beloved trilogy before it.

Because if you are not better than the side you are excoriating for terrible practices, then you have no moral leg to stand on. Worse, people who are looking in from the outside will assume that you are a lying piece of shit and thus won't feel obliged to help out when the situation becomes worse.

Welcome to the real world, you don't always get your way by being honest (I learned that lesson a long time ago), I perfer to fight things now then do it when thing are to late. You are the bigger problem, you basically "you don't have to use it and just go to youtube and see the ending on youtube if you don't want to complete act 4", you are giant sucker for video game companies who only fights when it way to late for it.

The question then is "is additional paid for DLC bad in general?", only because it has been pre-announced? Would, for example, the two additional tribes for the nemesis system be in the game at all if there were no DLC? I would say "no", since the game seems to be feature complete. However, two storylines ended a bit inconclusively, so I guess they were laying the groundwork for the other two story DLC's.

I would say a lot of DLC are pointless in general in games.
but that wasn't the point I was trying to make.

Yes, because most reviewers looked at the game from a journalistically professional viewpoint, i.e. based on facts, not assumptions.

or they just don't care what might happen in future.

Shadow of War also ends on a definite note in act three. Act four just shows happening what was insinuated would happen with the main ending and then throws in a reward cutscene, which, again, you can easily view for free on Youtube. Please stop with the attitude that it is still a pre-Youtube era. If you got tired of the gameplay, there was every opportunity to throw in the towel and take the easy route. If you are compulsive obsessive enough to want to get the final cutscene in-game, well then it's effort = reward. Like in other beloved games, like Dark Souls, or so I heard.

I'm not a dark souls fan, because the story is very minimal in it,
Also if you want to play pure gameplay go play multiplayer, so I can enjoy my story singleplayer in peace.

[Alienmorph]

Yeah... sorry but the whole "if you want the story go watch it on Youtube and don't complain about the grind!" is a very very backward argument... hard to achieve endings are not a problem per se, but I don't buy into that excuse. If you can't make your gameplay good enough to get me through the 100% unlock "it's on YouTube, so don't complain!" is not a valid counter-argument. And it's a problem of many games, not just SoW. Had the same issues with the Batman Arkham games... only managed to get one or two 100% complete... and with various JRPGs, who are also infamous for this.

There's a big difference between "challenging" and "so boring or repetetive that I don't wanna play anymore".

[magnuskn]

wrong, it forces me to stop playing the game and go to youtube to see the ending instead of earning it myself.

Nobody stops you from "earning the ending" if you want to continue playing the game to do so. It's actually fun, if you enjoy the game. I wonder if you'll ever actually try playing it, instead of complaining about something which you have never actually done.

if video game company ever said something like that, a lot of people would be pissed.

It's pretty inherent to many video games nowadays that they got an extra cutscene for the people who put in the effort. The game ends on a definite note at the end of act three, the only thing the devs did wrong, IMO, was not playing the credits until the end of act four. Act four was put in, by the word of the developers, for the fans who could not get enough of the gameplay even in the first game, which includes me for example.

you can do the same with a lot of the riddler trophies as the story goes a long hell that's what I did,
Shadow of war just says "do this now because I say so", it doesn't give the option before the act 4 begins to go out and do while the story goes along.

I found a lot of the riddler trophies in Arkham Knight to be really bloody annoying, contrary to most in the two prior games. Which is why I didn't do them in the end. I think some involved the retarded batcar, IIRC.
I've stated my thoughts on act four of SoW one paragraph above.

I still perfer that over reviewers who don't know what putting lotboxes in singleplayer can lead.
A lot of those problems have existed in the Elder scrolls games for well over a decade now and those games get praised to the sky and beyond, ME:A is mediocre game that got a lot of blame, because 1 it's BW game (there is a lot of different exceptions among other things) and 2 it's already had a beloved trilogy before it.

I think most reviewers mentioned the lootboxes (95% of them, or so about), but most came to the conclusion that they should not deduct points from a good game because of things which might happen in the future. The sites which wrote articles/did videos on the specific loot box problem stated that they would start docking points to games when lootboxes would actually affect the single player experience, which they clearly don't do in Shadow of War.

As for ME:A, of course it was judged on being a BioWare game and being in the Mass Effect universe. That doesn't excuse its glitches, grindy gameplay, boring as hell characters and inane storyline, it only put that into clearer focus, because we got prior games from the same company and from the same universe to compare them against. I thought ME:A was a pretty mediocre game overall, but I hated a lot of aspects of it irrespective of it being a successor to the other Mass Effect games. Things introduced with DA:I, which I also thought was not very good.

Welcome to the real world, you don't always get your way by being honest (I learned that lesson a long time ago), I perfer to fight things now then do it when thing are to late. You are the bigger problem, you basically "you don't have to use it and just go to youtube and see the ending on youtube if you don't want to complete act 4", you are giant sucker for video game companies who only fights when it way to late for it.

Thanks for the personal insults, fuck you very much. I prefer to punch people in the mouth with the truth, instead of doing tea leaf reading of "what might happen". We'll deal with the problem when it actually arrives and until then I don't plan to invent stories wholecloth to make myself feel better. My personal idol is Glenn Greenwald, who uses the "punch people in the mouth with the truth" method very successfully to expose people who are fucking hypocrites. Works excellently in the field of politics, will work excellently when the time comes to denounce games which use single player microtransactions which you actually need in the game to succeed. Shadow of War ain't that, though.

or they just don't care what might happen in future.

Ah, yes, the fable of "all reviewers are bought out by the companies, except the ones which this time wrote a negative review". Which is laughable on its own, given that this time it was Gamespot and Polygon, not exactly noted for being mavens of consumer protection in their other reviews. I wonder when it will be time for IGN to have its spot in the "reviewer hero rotation". Outrage addicts are such fucking sheep. :-/

I'm not a dark souls fan, because the story is very minimal in it,
Also if you want to play pure gameplay go play multiplayer, so I can enjoy my story singleplayer in peace.

You got a decent (if only functional) story from acts one to three, hours of cutscenes. Then people who love the gameplay get a long section of pure gameplay, ended by three minutes of cutscene. Which is a nice extra closure to the personal arc of Talion, but you get enough of that by the ending of act three for all the main characters.

Yeah... sorry but the whole "if you want the story go watch it on Youtube and don't complain about the grind!" is a very very backward argument... hard to achieve endings are not a problem per se, but I don't buy into that excuse. If you can't make your gameplay good enough to get me through the 100% unlock "it's on YouTube, so don't complain!" is not a valid counter-argument. And it's a problem of many games, not just SoW. Had the same issues with the Batman Arkham games... only managed to get one or two 100% complete... and with various JRPGs, who are also infamous for this.

There's a big difference between "challenging" and "so boring or repetetive that I don't wanna play anymore".

Unless I'm mistaken you haven't played neither of the game in the "Shadow of..." series as well? How would you know that the gameplay is boring and repetitive? I agree with you on the Batman Arkham games (I got the ones in Asylum and City because of some obsessive compulsive need to "complete the game" myself, but found that too bothersome in Knight), but I personally enjoy the gameplay in Shadow of War so much that I don't feel the grindyness very much.

I can understand the general attitude of "Don't lock any true endings behind a grind", because that is based on a logical principle. Maybe Shadow of Wars "true ending" really has a bit too much meaning for the end of the personal journey of Talion, however the actual storyline gets a definite ending in act three. Again, the developers should have run credits after act three to separate the sections more clearly, that was a definite fault of them.

[Alienmorph]

Like I said, I was arguing that mentality as an whole, not specifically to SoW now.

[TTTX]

wrong, it forces me to stop playing the game and go to youtube to see the ending instead of earning it myself.

Nobody stops you from "earning the ending" if you want to continue playing the game to do so. It's actually fun, if you enjoy the game. I wonder if you'll ever actually try playing it, instead of complaining about something which you have never actually done.

if video game company ever said something like that, a lot of people would be pissed.

It's pretty inherent to many video games nowadays that they got an extra cutscene for the people who put in the effort. The game ends on a definite note at the end of act three, the only thing the devs did wrong, IMO, was not playing the credits until the end of act four. Act four was put in, by the word of the developers, for the fans who could not get enough of the gameplay even in the first game, which includes me for example.

you can do the same with a lot of the riddler trophies as the story goes a long hell that's what I did,
Shadow of war just says "do this now because I say so", it doesn't give the option before the act 4 begins to go out and do while the story goes along.

I found a lot of the riddler trophies in Arkham Knight to be really bloody annoying, contrary to most in the two prior games. Which is why I didn't do them in the end. I think some involved the retarded batcar, IIRC.
I've stated my thoughts on act four of SoW one paragraph above.

I still perfer that over reviewers who don't know what putting lotboxes in singleplayer can lead.
A lot of those problems have existed in the Elder scrolls games for well over a decade now and those games get praised to the sky and beyond, ME:A is mediocre game that got a lot of blame, because 1 it's BW game (there is a lot of different exceptions among other things) and 2 it's already had a beloved trilogy before it.

I think most reviewers mentioned the lootboxes (95% of them, or so about), but most came to the conclusion that they should not deduct points from a good game because of things which might happen in the future. The sites which wrote articles/did videos on the specific loot box problem stated that they would start docking points to games when lootboxes would actually affect the single player experience, which they clearly don't do in Shadow of War.

As for ME:A, of course it was judged on being a BioWare game and being in the Mass Effect universe. That doesn't excuse its glitches, grindy gameplay, boring as hell characters and inane storyline, it only put that into clearer focus, because we got prior games from the same company and from the same universe to compare them against. I thought ME:A was a pretty mediocre game overall, but I hated a lot of aspects of it irrespective of it being a successor to the other Mass Effect games. Things introduced with DA:I, which I also thought was not very good.

Welcome to the real world, you don't always get your way by being honest (I learned that lesson a long time ago), I perfer to fight things now then do it when thing are to late. You are the bigger problem, you basically "you don't have to use it and just go to youtube and see the ending on youtube if you don't want to complete act 4", you are giant sucker for video game companies who only fights when it way to late for it.

Thanks for the personal insults, fuck you very much. I prefer to punch people in the mouth with the truth, instead of doing tea leaf reading of "what might happen". We'll deal with the problem when it actually arrives and until then I don't plan to invent stories wholecloth to make myself feel better. My personal idol is Glenn Greenwald, who uses the "punch people in the mouth with the truth" method very successfully to expose people who are fucking hypocrites. Works excellently in the field of politics, will work excellently when the time comes to denounce games which use single player microtransactions which you actually need in the game to succeed. Shadow of War ain't that, though.

or they just don't care what might happen in future.

Ah, yes, the fable of "all reviewers are bought out by the companies, except the ones which this time wrote a negative review". Which is laughable on its own, given that this time it was Gamespot and Polygon, not exactly noted for being mavens of consumer protection in their other reviews. I wonder when it will be time for IGN to have its spot in the "reviewer hero rotation". Outrage addicts are such fucking sheep. :-/

I'm not a dark souls fan, because the story is very minimal in it,
Also if you want to play pure gameplay go play multiplayer, so I can enjoy my story singleplayer in peace.

You got a decent (if only functional) story from acts one to three, hours of cutscenes. Then people who love the gameplay get a long section of pure gameplay, ended by three minutes of cutscene. Which is a nice extra closure to the personal arc of Talion, but you get enough of that by the ending of act three for all the main characters.

Yeah... sorry but the whole "if you want the story go watch it on Youtube and don't complain about the grind!" is a very very backward argument... hard to achieve endings are not a problem per se, but I don't buy into that excuse. If you can't make your gameplay good enough to get me through the 100% unlock "it's on YouTube, so don't complain!" is not a valid counter-argument. And it's a problem of many games, not just SoW. Had the same issues with the Batman Arkham games... only managed to get one or two 100% complete... and with various JRPGs, who are also infamous for this.

There's a big difference between "challenging" and "so boring or repetetive that I don't wanna play anymore".

Unless I'm mistaken you haven't played neither of the game in the "Shadow of..." series as well? How would you know that the gameplay is boring and repetitive? I agree with you on the Batman Arkham games (I got the ones in Asylum and City because of some obsessive compulsive need to "complete the game" myself, but found that too bothersome in Knight), but I personally enjoy the gameplay in Shadow of War so much that I don't feel the grindyness very much.

I can understand the general attitude of "Don't lock any true endings behind a grind", because that is based on a logical principle. Maybe Shadow of Wars "true ending" really has a bit too much meaning for the end of the personal journey of Talion, however the actual storyline gets a definite ending in act three. Again, the developers should have run credits after act three to separate the sections more clearly, that was a definite fault of them.

ugh I to sick to continue arguing, so let's just agree to disagree and leave it that.

[magnuskn]

Okeydokey, probably for the best, anyway.

[Someone With Mass]

Yeah... sorry but the whole "if you want the story go watch it on Youtube and don't complain about the grind!" is a very very backward argument... hard to achieve endings are not a problem per se, but I don't buy into that excuse. If you can't make your gameplay good enough to get me through the 100% unlock "it's on YouTube, so don't complain!" is not a valid counter-argument. And it's a problem of many games, not just SoW. Had the same issues with the Batman Arkham games... only managed to get one or two 100% complete... and with various JRPGs, who are also infamous for this.

There's a big difference between "challenging" and "so boring or repetetive that I don't wanna play anymore".

I honestly don't miss games that have those "complete everything 100% to unlock a special bonus ending" things in them. Then I'll just resort into either pulling up a guide, which sucks the fun out of it or just look it up on YouTube, because it's rarely feels like it's worth the time.

Halo is doing it right by giving a bonus clip to the ending if you beat the campaign on the highest difficulty. It's challenging and a lot of people want to complete things on the highest difficulty.

There were some Final Fantasy games that had the 100% endings and I really don't like that, since it's easy to screw yourself in a 40-50 hour run.

[TTTX]

I honestly don't miss games that have those "complete everything 100% to unlock a special bonus ending" things in them. Then I'll just resort into either pulling up a guide, which sucks the fun out of it or just look it up on YouTube, because it's rarely feels like it's worth the time.

Halo is doing it right by giving a bonus clip to the ending if you beat the campaign on the highest difficulty. It's challenging and a lot of people want to complete things on the highest difficulty.

There were some Final Fantasy games that had the 100% endings and I really don't like that, since it's easy to screw yourself in a 40-50 hour run.

1 of the worst of those kind of game I ever played is Final Fantasy X-2 where you had to complete everything (talk with every NPC, complete every dungeon etc) to get 100% to get the real Ending which is close to impossible in that game as it has acts cutting off some previous stuff of the game and you don't have guide or anything telling you have done everything in that act in game.

[Mazder]

Unless I'm mistaken you haven't played neither of the game in the "Shadow of..." series as well? How would you know that the gameplay is boring and repetitive? I agree with you on the Batman Arkham games (I got the ones in Asylum and City because of some obsessive compulsive need to "complete the game" myself, but found that too bothersome in Knight), but I personally enjoy the gameplay in Shadow of War so much that I don't feel the grindyness very much.

I can understand the general attitude of "Don't lock any true endings behind a grind", because that is based on a logical principle. Maybe Shadow of Wars "true ending" really has a bit too much meaning for the end of the personal journey of Talion, however the actual storyline gets a definite ending in act three. Again, the developers should have run credits after act three to separate the sections more clearly, that was a definite fault of them.

It's more a case of the concept of "the story is on a third party platform we have no control over". That is straight up bad design.
If the thing people would be interested in your game for is not the gameplay then you're a shit games designer/developer, plain and simple. If you can not think of a way to extend the life of your game to fulfill the story needs then you need to go back to the drawing board.
If your game doesn't have the ability to hold the audience's attention for the case of youtube videos to be a thing in the first place then telling people to go away from your business is not the right thing to do either.

If the "True Ending" to a story is not a part of the story itself and is locked away by either a ridiculous time sink or some other completionist task then that ending clearly wasn't designed correctly, especially if it involves a great moment for one of the protagonists.

Personally I am of the mind of don't lock anything behind a grind wall because that's shitty game design.
Also I've only put in about 9 hours of the first game and I got bored pretty fast because I didn't know if I was actually getting anywhere or not.

[magnuskn]

To each his own, I guess. Six sieges from the end for me, which after getting my orcs to level 60 will be about 2-3 more hours. Then it's either off to play Warhammer Total War 2 (hopefully with the Mortal Empires campaign, should come out soon) or maybe making the castles ready for online assaults from other players, just for the heck of it. ^^

Oh, yeah, and I found my first game-stopping bug today, when the intro speech for an orc captain didn't play and after one minute of him and Talion staring awkwardly at each other I had to close the game through the task manager. Had zero CTD's in 80 hours, unlike Joe.

[Dragaros]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgYXXVzz7UQ

[SciFlyBoy]

If you're looking for a fun game involving girls in bikinis firing water guns at each other, then pick up Senran Kagura Peach Beach Splash. I got it as a gift the other day and I'm real into it. I watched the anime so I'm familiar with some of the characters, but it's part of a larger game universe set in the Senran Kagura world. Sexy ninja girls battle each other in a fan-service drenched series.

[Dragaros]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inLQTuaAcH8

[Dragaros]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gp6LaDA0Q4M

[Alienmorph]

Yeah. Still don't care about DoW3. It's just more maps and heroes, but doesn't mean dick if the core game isn't good. So unfortunate.

Speaking of 40k, there's a new rumor going around that the possible new faction coming to the 8th edition of the game will be the Adeptus Arbites... personally I think it would be a giant slap in the face to all those who want more xenos or the Sisters of Battle getting a full army at last. But they would make for a decent counter to the Genestealer Cult, since they're both hiveworld-based...

[Vol]

Yeah, NeoGAFs still down. All the admins and most of the mods quit, the owner's old sexual abuse allegations came back up, as I hear it, and this time they stuck. Or a new one maybe? But people are crowing the site's done for.

[Someone With Mass]

Yeah, NeoGAFs still down. All the admins and most of the mods quit, the owner's old sexual abuse allegations came back up, as I hear it, and this time they stuck. Or a new one maybe? But people are crowing the site's done for.

Allegedly, he had gotten into a shower with a drunk girl who hadn't given or shown consent. It was meant to be a couple of drinks between friends and it ended up with resentment from the guy after he had driven her to another town. The girl's boyfriend broke up not much later too.

She dropped the forum name of NeoGAF's owner on Facebook and everyone went ape-shit.

I personally never cared enough about NeoGAF to visit it, but I've heard that it was a circle-jerk cesspool that cracked down hard on people with opinions that were different from the mob's general opinion. If that's the case, then fuck 'em.

[Alienmorph]

From what I've eared the accused person have been suspected of similar types of herassements (ohGod... for once using that word makes sense...aaand I wish it didn't) but managed to slither his way out of things without being formally accused and prosecuted. So that alone makes it more suspect than most of these kind of claims. And the way the man was trying to shut up everyone talking about this doesn't bode well for him either... you don't mass-censor people, without even trying to defend yourself, if there isn't at least some truth behind what you're being accused of. Or unless you are a complete and utter idiot that wouldn't deserve that kind of power over a community anyway.

[UNiT]

Anyone played Divinity Original sin 2 around here?