Creston wrote on Feb 27, 2017, 16:40:

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Feb 27, 2017, 16:29:
My fatal mistake with that guy was I got killed by him once, and the power he gained was "Immune to Arrows," or whatever it's called in game.

So yeah he comes back even if he dies, and I could only kill him with a mounted beast attack. It's sorta good, in a way, you can steamroll most of the lieutenants with no problem whatsoever, just that guy had immunity to basically 98% of the player's abilities.

Yeah, that's bad. A critter should never become totally immune to basically everything. How does that even work in the lore? Even Sauron isn't immune to everything.

Hopefully they'll do a bit better balancing in the second one.

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Feb 27, 2017, 13:50:
I started out loving the first one, then got worn out with the grind. I maxxed out my character's abilities, but had utterly no desire to finish the story.

Also, there is at least one combo of Orc chief abilities that is basically untouchable: Ranged High Damage, Cannot Be Surprised, Cannot be Executed, Cannot be Harmed in Melee. In the second 'zone' it's possible for a guy to spawn with all of that.

So basically you cannot harm him except with a mounted beast, but then he can kill a mounted beast from range pretty easily.

I'm pretty sure I still have my saves though, it's on my list of things to go back and finish if somehow all my other games vanish.

NKD wrote on Feb 27, 2017, 15:41:
Twitch (part of Amazon) has a lot of reach in gaming and the potential to put some serious competitive heat on Steam. Hopefully it works out well so that Valve has to step up their game.

Bundy wrote on Feb 27, 2017, 14:35:

Realmk wrote on Feb 27, 2017, 14:26:
the progressive hive mind of stupid is pretty rampant on this site to begin with.

The truest thing ever said on blues.

CJ_Parker wrote on Feb 27, 2017, 09:36:
And this is exactly why gaming is going down the shitter.

Pr()ZaC wrote on Feb 27, 2017, 09:49:
I'll surely help selling it to younger audiences (T).

Cutter wrote on Feb 27, 2017, 10:31:
Yeah, it was alright but that's it. Way to grindy and repetitive. I didn't have a problem finishing it but have zero desire to ever go back to it again.

Slick wrote on Feb 26, 2017, 21:51:
To be fair, Bioware did seem to withhold a large portion of the plot resolution behind DLC in Dragon Age: Inquisition, their last game.

Whatever, I pre-ordered, I miss this series. Bioware is equal to bethesda in the RPG story-weaving department, possibly superior to them, where every quest isn't generic and derivative. And even if it is a dumb fetch quest, there's a high probability that it will turn into something much more interesting, hidden twists etc. Plus bioware has great writing.

Creston wrote on Feb 26, 2017, 10:52:
I fortunately work in an area where automation really doesn't work, as it's heavily skill-based, but yeah, if I worked in ANY kind of manufacturing capacity, I would be highly concerned about losing my job.

And we know all the imbecile corporations will gladly make 95% of the workforce redundant if they could, and it wouldn't be until years later where they'd go "Wait. Why aren't we selling anything anymore??"

And the Universal Basic Income thing, sigh. Where is that money going to come from? An estimate I saw on CNBC for the US would put the cost of a UBI at 4 TRILLION dollars per year. So that's literally DOUBLE the current budget, which the government already can't finance to the tune of $1 billion+ shortages every single year.

Creston wrote on Feb 22, 2017, 21:02:

RedEye9 wrote on Feb 22, 2017, 16:19:

Creston wrote on Feb 22, 2017, 13:47:
What the shit, AMD? I thought you'd been saying you were looking to get market share back, and would price accordingly. And then you charge $329 for your cheapest processor?

It beats the $440 dollar 6800k. Not sure if you want to get you panties in a wad just yet.
Besides, AMD just can't give their processors away, that would not make good business sense in the long run.

That's fair enough, but I kind of expected them to come in sub 300.

Beamer wrote on Feb 22, 2017, 09:07:
Republicans are touting Lincoln so much

HoSpanky wrote on Feb 22, 2017, 18:46:
Currently, a lot of games don't do multithreading very well, and end up putting most of the load on one core. So I'm curious what the single-core performance is on these more than multicore. That's the main deciding factor for me, cinebench is 100% useless as a performance metric.

RedEye9 wrote on Feb 22, 2017, 16:19:

Creston wrote on Feb 22, 2017, 13:47:
What the shit, AMD? I thought you'd been saying you were looking to get market share back, and would price accordingly. And then you charge $329 for your cheapest processor?

It beats the $440 dollar 6800k. Not sure if you want to get you panties in a wad just yet.
Besides, AMD just can't give their processors away, that would not make good business sense in the long run.

jdreyer wrote on Feb 22, 2017, 12:19:
Don't miss out on that Amazon deal. Just placed mine. Free money!

Sepharo wrote on Feb 22, 2017, 10:37:
Sounds like you both missed the point of the charge and course. They didn't want the tech to launch with bad word of mouth from amateurs who didn't understand how to use it. Now that it's proven and past the point where layman can fuck its reputation easily, they feel safe to release it to everyone.