FrostyRei wrote on Nov 24, 2021, 09:32:
Discrimination: this used to be, "He called me a f*g" and move on in life.Now it's all lawsuits and cancellations for having called your female colleague 'mate'. Laughable now.

Do you have any actual evidence of this? Did a woman win a lawsuit because she was called 'mate' by a colleague? It seems like you just want to excuse discrimination. Although you are correct that back in the 'good ol days', women would put up with a hell of a lot more crap from men in the workplace than they do now. I call it progress.

Been having fun with the Satisfactory update. No new recipes unfortunately but lots of new QoL stuff to make base building easier. I never went for a huge megabase before, as building big was kind of a frustrating experience. Much less so now, so I might give it a go.

LordSteev wrote on Nov 17, 2021, 17:25:
I read somewhere else, maybe it was Game Informer, that it has plenty of things like throwing knives, bows, and crossbows, and that they work pretty well and even allow you to stealth if you want to. I'm looking forward to this even in single play if I can creep through levels firing off bow stealth shots until I'm noticed, then hightailing it for higher ground. Sounds great.

That sounds great then. I interpreted "no guns" to mean there were no ranged weapons at all, but you're right that it doesn't exclude bows and crossbows, which would be fun to play with. Nice to know.

Xero wrote on Nov 17, 2021, 13:54:
I still don't understand why they put Dead Island 2 on hold to push out Dying Light 2. Between the two games, I found Dead Island so much more enjoyable. Who the heck doesn't want to be stranded on a beautiful island resort with the undead? It was such an awesome contrast. The beautiful views of the ocean and palm trees and the walking dead roaming the streets and areas.

I'm dying (pun intended) for a new Dead Island. Dying Light was such a common, typical location, I just couldn't into it much the same way DI grabbed me in.

Yea I would prefer the Dead Island setting, as long as it had the polish and parkour of Dying Light. DI was great, but it was a bit janky. DL took the gameplay to another level and was a better game for it IMO.

Story in DL2 is irrelevant for me, so I don't mind if it's a "dud". Can't be any worse than DL. The article does mention that there are no guns in DL2 though, and I'm not sure how I feel about that. I don't think I mind that as long as they nail the melee combat, and possibly include some throwing weapons. I didn't use guns in DL much except against human opponents that were also armed with guns, so maybe it's no big deal. Really looking forward to DL2.

Thoughts and prayers for Bobby! Hope he recovers from the minor headache that this scandal has surely induced!

The Pyro wrote on Nov 14, 2021, 16:18:

...which have small hints of a larger world and story to act as a hook, but which background them in favor of foregrounding the things games are actually good at: gameplay, technical and tactical skill development, exploration, and puzzle solving.

My thoughts exactly. A game like this doesn't need much of a story, so IMO the biggest mistake you can make is putting too much emphasis on narrative. And often the world is more interesting when you tell the player almost nothing. The alien ruins in the first Metroid game had little explanation, and I think the game was better for it.

You both said it better than I ever could. You don't play a Metroid game for the story, or some kind of complex narrative. If that's what you're after, you should not play Metroid Dread. The last thing I would want is a narrative getting in the way of my gameplay in a game like this. There is a speaking NPC that shows up fairly early on in the game to deliver some exposition, and I couldn't wait for him to shut up so I could get on with the game. Luckily that doesn't happen often, and the game knows better than to put too much focus on this aspect of the game. There's just enough exposition throughout to give you a goal and help you along from time to time, and that's it. I quite enjoyed my experience with the game.

MeanJim wrote on Nov 11, 2021, 17:23:
I just don't get the hype over Skyrim. It's just a mediocre ARPG.

For me, it's the sandbox and exploration aspects that really sucked me in. You can just go and do whatever you hell you want (mostly). The appeal was never the crappy story, forgettable generic characters, or even the quests themselves, which were mostly mediocre but occasionally decent. I just loved running around, exploring the world, collecting loot, finding secrets, and killing things. It was always exciting diving into a newly discovered cave, having no idea of what may be lurking inside. It might be bandits, or it might be a powerful mage that torches you to death in seconds. The joy of discovery.

The main quest/story is unbelievably dull though. Initially, a bug prevented me from getting more than about 50% through the main story on my initial playthrough, so I accumulated nearly 200 hours in the game without beating it. Later on, I started a new game so I could finish the main story and was really disappointed. What a waste of time that was.

Burrito of Peace wrote on Nov 3, 2021, 22:59:
Jared Leto is almost always an instant turn-off for me. He hams it up so, so hard in everything I have seen him in and not in a good way. He was a terrible Joker, he was by far the worst part of Blade Runner 2049, and to see him attached to Tron 3 gives me little hope for it even though I loved Tron Legacy.

I think he's a good actor but he needs to stop playing these weird, eccentric characters that encourage him to, as you say, ham it up. He was indeed the worst part of Blade Rubber 2049, which I otherwise loved. He's fine when he's not playing an oddball, but unfortunately that seems to be a rare occurrence at this stage of his career. He's got Johnny Depp syndrome (except Johnny Depp actually isn't a very good actor IMHO).

Holy cow, the comments section that GTA6 article are something else. I guess it's not too much worse than a typical YouTube video comments section but still, It's pretty disturbing. I wish Nazis would find their own little hobby and stay out of gaming.

Anyway, with regards to GTA6, yea it's not surprising that development has been rocky since they've been wanting to scale back on the scope of their projects after Daniel Houser left, but at the same time it's part of the appeal of the GTA games that they have always been these huge productions with big worlds, lots of stories, tons of shit to do in the world. They want to have their cake and eat it. But you can't take away the grandiose production of the game and still have a GTA game. They might be able to get a decent game out of it, but it won't be a GTA game as we know it.

Armengar wrote on Oct 28, 2021, 11:25:
i was never a fan of vanilla fo3. New Vegas was excellent though and had some brilliant mods.

I thought I was the only one. F:NV was the better game in every way. I even preferred FO4 over FO3. FO3 was ok but was a huge disappointment to me when it came out as a Fallout fan.

I played AoE2 co-op skirmishes but I don't recall if it had a campaign or not. I guess it did. I skipped AoE3 for some reason, but I'll probably pick this one up. I guess I assumed this one had no campaign because all of the promo stuff I happened to stumble across was PvP focused.

As as more casual RTS gamer (I never play PvP, strictly single player or co-op) this looks like it might be right up my alley. Love the historical setting and the fact that this has actual campaigns, which I was surprised to find out, is great. I always assumed this was going to be PvP only since that's all people seem to care about, but that's not the case.

The Flying Penguin wrote on Oct 23, 2021, 10:39:
The previous day, Baldwin's stunt double was handed what was supposed to be an unloaded gun and wound up firing two rounds accidently. That should have shut down production for a safety review right there, and if they had, a needless death would have been avoided.

If that is true, then it makes me wonder if that kind of mishap happens from time to time and we just never hear about it because it doesn't result in injury. Like you said, I would think that it would have been taken very seriously the first time and resulted in a review of safety procedures. Maybe it did, and it still happened again anyway. It might be a while before we get the full story of what exactly happened.

Yea this is... odd. Drake Hollow, their latest game, seems to be a cartoony open world co-op survival game, and based on that I'm going to speculate this will be similar game set in the Witcher universe, where players can take bounties and fight monsters together as Witchers. Like Monster Hunter I guess, but more open world. Curious.

RogueSix wrote on Oct 22, 2021, 17:59:

milspecmonkey wrote on Oct 22, 2021, 17:35:
There isn't anything wrong with more training, but at some point it has to be acknowledged a movie is a team effort and the armorer has the most responsibility making sure no one gets shot. With your type of logic apparently the actor is also on the hook to make sure lights don't fall down from the set, all stunts are setup "safe", pyrotechnics work right, catered food is safe, etc...

Sorry, but those are rather poor analogies. The actor does not handle the lights, the pyrotechnics etc. and the actor is often times not even on the set when stunts are shot, much less taking any active part in them.

The point is sound, though. Actors handle all kinds of prop weapons aside from guns. Are actors personally responsible for performing complete teardowns and inspections of all prop dynamite, grenades, etc. that they handle? How about if they're in a scene where they have to toss a jar of bubbling green acid into someone's face? Should they do a chemical analysis of the fluid that they will be tossing at their co worker? As for going full digital, it looks terrible in all of the examples I've seen but if they can improve the CG and invent better fake guns with proper recoil then I'm all for it.

Dev wrote on Oct 22, 2021, 14:51:

TheBigVlad wrote on Oct 22, 2021, 13:19:

Dev wrote on Oct 22, 2021, 12:15:
ALWAYS! ALWAYS! Treat a gun as loaded and ready to go off with actual live bullets (not blanks)!

While you should follow the standard gun safety rules when handling firearms in day-to-die life, they don't always apply directly when handling props in movies. Otherwise we would never have scenes where people point guns at each other, or hand each other guns.

Wrong!
They always make it LOOK like they point at each other. In reality they don't. Unless it's with safeguards for the camera people (not actors since they won't be there) in the line of fire. Like I said earlier. It's a matter of perspective and camera angle. Again, this is done for safety reasons. Or the gun is a plastic prop that cannot fire bullets. Or an airsoft version that can't generally kill someone.
As for handing each other guns, that should always be done unloaded with zero bullets and zero blanks. And verified by more than one person handing the actor the prop gun.

Some quotes from a movie industry armorer who knows far more than you or I:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59006905

"There's basic safety measures on every set," said Mike Tristano, an armourer who has worked with Alec Baldwin in the past.

"You never point a gun, even if it is not a firing gun, at anyone else. I'm at a loss how this could have happened and how it could have done that much damage."

A common shot in film shows an actor firing into the camera and Steven Hall, who has worked on films such as Fury and The Imitation Game, says it only happens with safeguards.

"If you are in the line of fire... You would have a face mask, you would have goggles, you would stand behind a Perspex screen, and you would minimise the number of people by the camera, " he said.

Actors do point guns at each other. All the time. They might use a fake gun prop when they need to get up close, but it's still a prop that looks like a gun. My whole point is that it is not necessarily the actor's responsibility to ensure that they are using the right kind of gun prop for the scene, or that the prop has been prepared correctly before being handed to the actor. They rely on the armorer to do their job. It's like if actors were doing a swordfight scene, it would not be the responsibility of the actor to ensure that the correct sword props were being used. They are handed the tool for the job, told what to do, and they go to work.

Edit: Harrison Ford Recklessly Fires a Prop Gun Into Crowd of Innocent People
An older example, but yea, actors do point guns and shoot at each other. There were probably less safeguards in place back then but I could find more recent examples. That's my favorite though.

This comment was edited on Oct 22, 2021, 15:45.

Kxmode wrote on Oct 22, 2021, 13:26:
Even if it was an accident, taking life scars a human in ways that change a person forever.

That's definitely true. These were his colleagues, and now one of them is dead, and he pulled the trigger. That's not something he'll be able to just get over. I wouldn't be surprised if he refuses to fire a gun ever again in a movie.

Dev wrote on Oct 22, 2021, 12:15:

Mr. Tact wrote on Oct 22, 2021, 12:03:
*yeesh* Death by prop gun? Life is rough enough without people dying at work due to someone else's mistake/error.

ALWAYS! ALWAYS! Treat a gun as loaded and ready to go off with actual live bullets (not blanks)!

While you should follow the standard gun safety rules when handling firearms in day-to-die life, they don't always apply directly when handling props in movies. Otherwise we would never have scenes where people point guns at each other, or hand each other guns. I don't know what happened in this case, but the actor and all involved must always have full trust in the armorer to do their job and ensure the gun is safe for whatever scene their doing. I doubt Baldwin was being reckless, as he has decades of experience handling guns in his films. Probably a freak accident.

I've read comments elsewhere from crazy gun nutters say that Baldwin was 100% responsible for ensuring the gun was safe, as he was the last one operating it. This is ridiculous of course. Again, normal gun safety rules don't always apply. In Star Wars, is it the actors who are responsible for ensuring that the blasters they use are safe and won't launch projectiles? How would they do that? Sorry, I'm just annoyed by some of the stupidity I've been reading in other threads about this.

It's the worst (canon) Fallout game but it's still fun for a playthrough. There are a lot of annoyances that keep me from coming back after I finish new content though. They partially addressed one of my biggest issues, which was having to constantly switch perk cards every time I wanted to craft, or pick a lock, or whatever. They added perk loadouts (or whatever they're called) but it still doesn't totally solve the problem. They really should just remove the level cap and allow you to eventually equip all perk cards at the same time, like in Fallout 4. No more swapping. This is a result of them trying to balance the game for multiplayer and it hurts the experience tremendously.

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Oct 20, 2021, 12:42:
I loved PoEt 1 and 2, as well as Tyranny. I started Outer Worlds but put it on hold waiting for the DLCs to all come out, I should get back to it. Did anybody play their other RPG, Grounded? It got some good reviews apparently.

I played Grounded co-op with a friend a while back. It's not an RPG at all. Nothing like anything Obsidian has done before. It's a survival/crafting/building game with some kind of overarching story to guide you along (though it was not finished at the time I played). It's fine for what it is, just wasn't my type of game (I prefer my survival/crafting games to be more sandbox). It's well-polished. Seems like it would be great co-op for someone to play with their kids, because of the subject matter.