8 days 


also my first post hey all

I'm sure I'm a bit late, but welcome to the forums! I pre-ordered the special edition (because I'm a sucker ) a week or two ago and I've realized that I watch my oblivion videos over and over when I try to kill time. It's anyone's guess how I'm going to get much work done these next few weeks.

Lol. Cotrienla's a speedy editor like I am.
In trying to realign with your original post, even though I know it was made back in October, I don't think that the 360 is currently getting enough coverage. Admittedly, Steve's podcast is the only one I listen to, but I visit several gaming sites on a near-daily basis, and this is the only game page that comes to mind that makes any mention of the failed deliveries and shortages. I could argue that articles about a new console are more valuable than articles about gaming, especially when something goes awry.

If we were to imagine this were televised news, then game news would be like the daily news. It's always current, and always has an undertone of urgency. I know family members have become obsessed with watching the news, because it is always late-breaking information, and it's hard to realize how unimportant all of it can be. (I happen to be the same way with gaming news. ) Console releases, on the other hand, are like elections: that's the real barometer of what is taking place in the (gaming) world, and it's an event that happens regularly but infrequently. Console releases should be huge, and people are getting fed up with the 360 because it's the only real candidate on the floor. I actually find that more interesting than a standard release, and I want to hear all the info that I can about it, good or bad, because this might set an odd precedent. If this release had gone flawlessly I think it'd be more common to see consoles no longer worrying about being released in sync with their competitors. Instead consoles would be released when they were ready for release.
So, would that mean that multiple generations of the same system will be active in the market at the same time? Imagine how important an issue like backwards-compatibility would be then! The PS3 could relax and learn from all of 360's mistakes, and the bashful Revolution could hide away for another two years only to be revealed as the greatest console ever, simply because the pressure to stay current would be even more relaxed than it is now.

Hopefully no-one will get carried away with my metaphor here. I don't want this thread to result in drawn party lines or bomb-throwing.

Then again, this is all politics to me anyways. It's just a different subject. And I'm apparently fond of run-ons.

I would say try as many MMOs as you want, then you'll be more likely to find something you like. Most offer a free trial at some point or another, so even if you don't want to buy a game you can try it out if you want.

I think one's interest all depends on how people chose to play these games. Lots of gamers like to log on, sit back and wait for the fun to wash over them by fighting baddies and finding new equipment. I couldn't maintain interest in WoW if I did that, and that's how I lost interest in EQ1, and DAoC. So I try to become more involved. I end up killing less, but become more immersed. I've spent hours at the library in Ironforge, reading up on different lore, and have explored zones on Kalimdor for hours while killing almost no enemies. I've been playing since release, and my highest lvl character is only 36, so I guess I'm a casual player if anyone is.

Anyway, I guess my playstyle is kind of abnormal, as all of my friends quickly surpass me, but that's ok. I'm paying to play the game my way, not their way.

So, I probably should've asked this earlier, but what was it about these MMOs that you disliked or found boring?

Hiya guys. It's been forever since I've posted. The forum memberlist has exploded over five fold since then! Fantastic job, Steve! 

A couple questions on a couple topics:
1.The NPCs are reported to have dynamic conversations, how long are these conversations expected to go on? Is every conversation designed to provide a quest or dialog option, or are some merely for atmosphere?
2. How many cities or towns will there be? Will inhabited areas run the gamut from small camps to full castles? Will there ever be friendly or 'safe' dungeons? Will more evolved forms of friendly NPCs inhabit dungeons than in Morrowind (such as merchants)?
3. If we can change how a NPC feels about us, is there a way to impact their schedules to a degree where we can form allies for quests or combat, without shifting the emphasis to group management?
4. How will saving work?
5. With such an emphasis on procedural generation of the game world, just how far is the draw distance, and how noticeable will object 'popping' be?
6. Do the developers feel that they have enough hours of recorded dialog?
7. Are they currently accepting applications? (just kidding )
8. How varied/customizable is the horse?
9. The day/night cycle has been reported to be 40 minutes (I think), is there any reason why this span of time was chosen?
10. Is the training of skills going to be more developed in Oblivion? Could I actually spar in the Guild Houses?

I'm sure the devs are tired of answering the same questions over and over again. Hopefully a couple of these are relatively original. I ended up with more than I planned.

I think I read somewhere that the maker of the original GTA (the 2D one) is working on an MMO called All Points Bulletin, which seems to be GTA, but players can play on cops too. I don't know anything else really, but S0lidmetal reminded me of this.

what do you think of this idea Zealousy?

you get two statue versions of your creature and a minimal clay modifier (pull around the skin not bone) and some options spikes, hair, coloring, ect to give creatures character.

you modify two statues and they can be the standard of variation for the species.

or for the gender minded, the gender modifier

I actually think that's a pretty cool idea. When I mentioned how cool it would be to have an actual mating ritual, I was thinking of one of Will's creatures with some peacock feathers trying to win over another of his species. and that seems pretty doable with this idea. Good one.

When I said earlier that mom and pop don't raise their young, I was referring to what I saw in the Spore presentations; and once an infant was born the members of the previous generation were gone. I wasn't talking about how things actually work, only what I've seen in the game videos. Just thought I'd clarify.

Again, I don't care what ends up in the final version, and obviously things will be different than what's been presented at the GDC and E3. If the developers add some kind of family dynamic, where sporians must be raised, then I still don't care what ends up in game, especially because there are/were certain species of animal that laid eggs and were not 'loner' creatures (various forms of dinosaurs, various birds, termites and other insects all have either a group or colony dynamic).

I definitely think an option would be cool though, and I don't see any disadvantage to adding this feature as another way to customize a creature; I just tend to be a bit of an empiricist over here, and so unless I see a feature mentioned by an official dev, I'll view it's implementation with some skepticism. It just makes surprises better that way.

I don't see how using an egg is cheating at all, because the adults are not looking after their young. There is no rearing of infants. I think an egg is the most appropriate, because once the baby's born mommy and daddy are gone; it's time to focus on the next generation. The background of the creature editor was mentioned by someone on these forums (perhaps even Steve) to resemble the inside of the egg. Plus, the fact that we're actively interacting with unborn life out in the wilderness seems to make an egg more appropriate: we can't walk around outside, find a random animal and look inside them to discover what's growing, but it's very easy to pick up an egg found outside and see what's inside. Besides seeming intuitive (at least for me ) I can also see its impact on gameplay; I'd rather click on an egg than a mother's stomach, especially if she's running around. I can understand the argument that mothers can stay at the nest and such, but I'd have to ask why. If I were playing I'd want all my creatures dripping with life, and not watch as certain members of my race are rendered immobile. With an egg I can have not only fully active creatures, but also a stationary point in the game world where I can interact with the next generation of my species.

I don't see a problem with using the egg as an icon either. Yes it's representative and is unrealistic, but I could use the same logic to dismiss the use of interfaces, or discredit RTS games (and even Spore) because of the way structures just 'appear' and aren't actually 'built,' and no-one from my army actually eats or sleeps. I'd say that all of Will Wright's games are exponentially more representative than realistic. This is extremist, but Spore is a game first, and a simulation of life second.

Of course, that's just one weirdo's opinion.