dwarf

You'll have to stop your urge to turn your TV off when playing Read Dead then. COMEDY RAINBOW!

Can I just clear this up? - I've never questioned the quality of Red Dead, I just said that it hampers the feeling of that new game somewhat when you have tons of other people playing it. For example, playing GUN on the Gamecube felt like I was alone in its world. This game is set up to be an online experience when I thought it was catering for a solo feel. I have no doubt the game is good online, it's just I thought it would be much more niche, and remind me of GUN in a way. If the game in question is Bad Company 2, or any game that I buy for online, then I'm glad about popularity. And this is why you irritate me sometimes, I've mentioned it before: You act extremely confrontational. Phrase your questions differently please, otherwise it sounds like you're bludgeoning every point you disagree with instead of posting an honest, friendly question. It's almost as if you have to comment on every part of someone's post even if there's only really one aspect you stand against. Firstly - no, it isn't elitism. Very judgemental comment there. Maybe you don't understand that a game may appeal more to me if it's less mainstream, but not due to the fact that I think I'm better or more knowledgeable than others because I 'spotted' it. There's a reason why I said 'generally' when referencing my sandbox dislike. Fallout 3 is an entirely different sandbox experience to the games that were mentioned i.e. Just Cause, and you were probably thinking of Red Dead. Games I could list in this pool that don't appeal to me include: GTA, Saints Row, Infamous, The Saboteur, Just Cause, Mercenaries, Red Faction, Prototype etc. None of those are like Fallout. Fallout is completely different from those for obvious reasons, and it's sandbox has vastly different dimensions and potential. The atmosphere, the narrative that isn't just a throw away to interrupt you from engaging in 3rd person action, and the RPG nature being give-aways. Now Red Dead Redemption for me doesn't belong in that list of titles I hate because, like Fallout, there are tons of focal points and extra things to do. That list of games feel like bunched together infrastructure, taking place in boring cities or towns, where you run around killing wave after wave of the same humans. RD:R and F3 almost brim with life in my eyes, and take place in interesting locales, as well as offering other elements that suit me more. Now that is me, I'm not sure there's anything to argue here. No six pages of discussion. However, with you there probably is, and I'm guessing an expected breakdown of each individual paragraph I've made, that comes to a head when you try to tell me how you don't sound confrontational.

Me and Rez completely luld at this, it's simply made for us, and we can't thank NaughtyDog enough for allowing us the chance to completely rape everyone, hard. It's as much as a lab for us as it is for them, because we get to test, in controlled conditions with high internal validity - how much do we really rape. My hypothesis - Rez and Dwarf will completely rape up.

I don't like Sandbox games generally speaking. Didn't enjoy the demo for JC2 either, I made a post detailing everything I didn't like about the game, it was quite extensive, but for some reason it was lost in one of the forum updates. Sorry to backhand your suggestion.

I'm not having a go at you for playing games, I just think you should be more selective and get more value from your games. If you don't like Socom that much, save money on something better, and play something you haven't got much out of instead. No I'll be glad for you to get Demon's Souls. I'll have done with it by the time it hits here, plus we're a gaming community here so it's not going to be unusual to see a few people cropping up playing it online. When it's all you friends and cousins buying a game you thought was going to be less commercial it does reduce that new-game vibe somewhat.

I largely disagree. Though it would be better said normally, I thought it was funny.

Yeah but you have bought pretty much every half-decent game and DLC for the PS3, so you're always going to recommend stuff. For example you bought the Socom DLC and recommended it even though you've hardly played it, moving onto the next game pretty much straight away, there's always something new for you. If I think it's good enough, of course I'll buy Red Dead. I have listed it in my top 3 for the rest of the year for good reason, I'm not considering it at the moment though because of exams. Playing Demon's Souls felt awesome because it almost feels like a privilege to play the game, all imported/niche products have that feel.

I want one, I just don't want one enough. If some shop did a scheme where you could trade in standard HDTVs for 3D TVs (obviously you'd have to pay a certain sum extra) I might be tempted. Problem is, current gen consoles are going to struggle with 3D, seeing as everything has to be rendered twice, or summut. This is one of the few games I'll happily buy brand new at release day.

Just a track I noticed in one of the trailers

A personal thing really, having tons of people on my friends list that are playing it makes it less niche. I don't usually mind if it's a big game but I didn't realise this would have the same kind of popularity factor as blockbuster releases.

Seeing Fawkes running around like a complete douche is kind of disheartening, but I guess in a way it makes the game feel retro, which I like.

Yeah I don't expect they are doing anything much with the engine, if anything I think they'll just make it run slightly smoother. As for animations... I think they'll be exactly the same.

call on me, call on me call on me, call on me call on me, call on me call on me, call on me call on me, call on me call on me, call on me call on me, call on me call on me, call on me -Call on me.

This year hasn't really taken off for me yet. Heavy Rain was good, Bad Company 2 started off being pretty cool but I've lost interest in it now. Haven't bought anything else that has come out this year. Red Dead looks pretty mint, but everyone and their mum has bought it, which is kind of annoying. Fallout New Vegas isn't out for ages, and nothing else really interests me. Stuff I was excited about before seems to have turned out average or I've just lost interest in it. I need a Resistance 3 to come out for ultimate win. Or something similarly insane.

I disagree. Obviously most of them have received better education, which does make them more likely to have better knowledge in their respective fields. You get the occasional breakthrough public school MP too, if they graft enough. As I said, it's also about knowing the figures and outcomes of making the decisions, as they wouldn't take this action lightly. As for being in a pickle - well it's a global crisis, so you can't really blame individuals. It would've been hard to foresee seeing as so few people did. @Pookiablo - It is purely based on economic grounds, they wouldn't decide to go against lowering costs because some people think it's wrong. Now your argument is just consisting of your apparent hatred for smokers, when originally the issue was 'why are the government wasting money?'. To which I gave you the answer. Of course addicted people need incentives to quit; because they are indeed addicted. They're obviously aware of the harmful effects of smoking, and whether you think it's stupid or not, people still smoke, so we have to try to help them. Helping them financially is arguably the best way of doing this as many smokers get themselves in debts because of their habits. They definitely aren't thinking of 'making a quick buck'. If that were true they wouldn't have bothered started smoking in the first place, because they could've saved money by not spending it on cigarettes. You have to remember that smokers are placing a high value on these goods because of taste, so you have to make them reconsider how much value they're placing on their next purchase of fags by showing them that they are losing government money if they continue to purchase. Ridiculously taxing fags is one thing, but this could work because they can see the actual money that they are turning down. Monetary incentives make perfect sense. It could give them that extra boost to stop, and when you couple that with existing factors that might make them stop - physical health - we may see a large decrease in smokers.

There's a few new images doing the rounds, this one is pretty good: http://www.falloutnow.de/fn/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view;id=1334 Still looking a bit ugly graphically, hopefully this is early-build though.

I see what you mean with the climbing bit. It's good there, but seems a bit rigid. If they made it a bit more seamless, like maybe zoom into the character just as they climb over the ledge before going into first person (so that the head wobbles realistically when getting back into position when in first person) it would make quite a big difference. And yeah I'd read that Naughty Dog were helping with graphics. From IGN also: That's the kind of stuff I want to hear. Although wacky weapons is more of a Reistance thing, it would make the solo experience better. Waiting for Helghast to pop up from cover got very boring, I'd rather bomb them out.

There's still very little point in complaining about it. You will never make tax universally fair. Tax isn't about receiving direct goods and services in exchange for your money. If there's a rise in tax you can't accredit it to one thing specifically, it is a general aid. You can say whatever you want about MPs, but those who know their beans get the best positions, and they're likely to know the best way to use tax. They'll have the figures, and it's likely that they know the potential positive outcome in bringing this scheme in.

Which Riddick game are you referring to?

My wishlist: -A good campaign that: isn't about shooting standard infantry and has a lot more crazy weapons like the bolt-gun and lightning gun. -Campaign co-op, the first was a bore fest and would've been passable with a friend (I think) -Even more striking visuals -More balanced multiplayer mode in terms of class abilities. The turrets and air support got quite annoying -Better map design. A couple of the maps were great, but there were so many choke-points in them, plus there were large useless areas where nothing happened -More maps. Weren't anywhere near enough maps when the game released. -The servers should always have pre-made games for every map. Usually there's just a select few levels to choose from when you go online at the moment. ----- Just to add, I love the sound of the potential variety that could be added to this genre. Whilst neither of the features are that original - having 'Uncharted-esque' platforming' with double jump ability, and being able to have violent hand to hand combat finishes, it could be really good. If they did something like in Metroid: Hunters where you could morph, except do something that isn't quite as ridiculous and game-breaking whilst in an FPS, it could be great. So you'd be combining elements of 3rd person action into an FPS, for more dramatic battles. Just little things like if you enter a mech, it shows you actually climbing into it in 3rd person briefly, and then you control the mech in 1st person. By mech I mean like the thing in the KZ2 campaign. Customising your appearance would actually make a difference because you could see yourself in these brief moments. Reflective surfaces (again, like at the start of the KZ2 campaign when Sev is looking at himself in the mirror) to build on identity. Meh, there's lots of potential ideas, not sure how many we'll see though.

That Buddha sloth at the end was amazing. I wantz one 2.

A friend of a friend of mine (student) put all of his £700 on Inter Winning in the final. I'm glad he won, imagine how gutted he would've been. I think he profited around a thousand quid, which is quite a lot considering the odds. It was probably less than that, but fair play to him anyway.