Peregrine

You can't find it because it doesn't exist. Dark0ne forgot to give us mere mortals a place to edit it. edit: now it's fixed, and is in the same place as the favorite game.

Congratulations, you've just discovered this thing called "politics", and taken the first steps to losing your innocent view of the world. Look a little closer and you'll also see a thing called "lack of responsibility", in which everyone blames someone else for everything that's bad, and passes pointless laws to hand the responsibility over to anyone they can find. The entire purpose is to buy votes with a "see, we're doing something" law that sounds good in theory, and makes nice speech material. This law already has zero connection to reality, the fact that the ESRB ratings are completely voluntary just makes it even more pointless. Yep, that violent game with a little icon on the box is going to corrupt childrens minds, but take the icon off and it's perfectly ok to sell. Clearly the solution is to ban rating icons, since they are responsible for turning children into murderers!

Isn't this a form of privatisation? Obviously your government endorses this (or a small section of it) since they have voted on it. Whether or not the organisation in question is government run or not shouldn't affect it. The point is, those ratings should have no legal force at all. The entire rating process is voluntary, not enforced by government law. All they'd have to do to make those 18-only games legal to sell would be to take the little rating icon off the box. Does this really make sense?

What I don't understand is how a voluntary private organization's ratings have been turned into law, and nobody is even slightly bothered by this. You do realize that these game ratings have absolutely no government authority, right? So yes, it would be entirely legal to sell GTA-Whatever if they simply took the rating off the box. The law really makes sense!

Exactly, I don't know what is so hard to understand about this. Inflation happens, prices rise over time. This is an inevitable fact of our economy, there is absolutely nothing you can do to change it. Game prices have been static for so long that they have fallen behind the usual inflation increases, and are just finally catching up to where they should be. It's pointless to whine about it and expect prices to fall again, because they aren't. The only way to drop game prices would be to cut development effort. Otherwise the company goes out of business. Or not. Not when multiplayer is such an important part of most games, and pirated versions don't work online. ------------------------------- They aren't going to, so you might as well get used to it. The only way you're going to get cheaper games is if you're willing to wait a few months for them to get the inevitable old-age price drop.

It will attract more buyers, but put them out of business. Prices increase, that's just a fact of life. Remember that thing called inflation? Game prices have been fairly static for a long time, so they're overdue for an increase. The only realistic way to cut prices is to move to online-only sales, using a system like Halflife2.

We don't really have 50,000 members. That number is counting the mandatory registration for downloading, 90% of them never even look at the forums. And half of them are probably the same person forgetting their old account information. But Dark0ne likes to claim big numbers, so it's useful for that I guess.

Here: Review index page. Clicking the "read more" link under Battle for Middle Earth. See how it only shows one review? And no hint of the comments, or even the other review thread on the game? It's presenting a really biased view of the game, since the first post is the only one that shows up. He obviously really loved the game, but someone reading that review is going to have no idea that there's a long discussion pointing out some flaws that make it nowhere near a 9.5/10 game. There should be at least a list of the other reviews and the ratings they gave at the bottom of the page, if not having all the links go to the index for that game.

This is news? It's more surprising that game prices have remained static for so long, regardless of inflation. Increasing development costs or not, a price increase was inevitable if they wanted to stay in business. Anyway, I don't see it having much of an effect. If a game's worth buying at full price, $50 and $60 are the same. If it's not, well, it'll find its way to the $10 pile no matter what its starting price.

Ok, I see them on that page. But if you go directly to the reviews page, clicking on a game in the list just gives one review, with no hint that there are others. It would make much more sense if the game title link went to an index of all reviews for that game. And yes, I see that they appear as individual links when you sort by title. But once the database gets larger, it's going to be harder to find them. Also, none of the forum comments appear in the review index. I've been posting my reviews of games as comments in the thread with the first one, but they don't appear on the index page. Yeah, I realize I could just post a new thread, but that makes the thread lists get crowded really quickly.

So what happens when someone gets a review posted first? Do all the other ones people have made count towards your contest and appear on the game's page? The way it is now seems a bit one-sided, the first person's opinion is the only one anyone sees. You need to add a clear place for all the user reviews.

It's pretty fun for mindless killing, and definitely a huge improvement over the original. Though I would've liked it if they had fixed some of the balance issues from the old version. Most importantly, getting rid of the AWP bunny hoppers. There are few things more annoying than watching someone sprint and jump out around the corner with a 5ft, 20lb sniper rifle then put a bullet through my head with flawless accuracy the moment their feet touch the ground.

So pretty much what you're saying is that after years of development and massive hype, their huge improvement consists of adding things that have been standard for years in PC games?

Does it give you any error messages? Are you sure you downloaded a good copy of it? Or, if all else fails, and you've got the connection speed for it, I could always send you .isos of the game cds.

I think I've found the explanation for the poor demo quality. You see, it wasn't supposed to be a demo. It was actually a gift to the fans, a chance to see a hated character die in an embarassing way. The admiral whose ship runs into a mine field and dies is the one giving you orders for half the game, and you quickly learn to hate his arrogance. So as a gift to the fans, they created a mission where you get to witness his very appropriate end. Then, behind schedule and needing a single player demo, they released the gift mission. Now that my copy arrived, I can safely say it's an amazing game. Except for some crash bugs, the game is one of the best I've ever played. And more importantly, it's the perfect engine to build the game I've spent the past three years dreaming of with.

Go play the rest. Buy a copy for yourself if you have to, or just download it if you've got the connection speed. It's one of the greatest games in history.

Agreed on the demo. Would it really have been that much to ask to include a tutorial mission? Impressive looking game though. Poor demo or not, it was enough to have my copy ordered. Everything good about Homeworld 2 (a game I loved), none of the bad parts, and potential to be the game engine I've been looking for to make the game I've been dreaming of for the past few years? It'll be a cold day in hell when I don't buy that!

How I wish I could actually run this game. It looks like it has potential, if only the graphics weren't so inefficiently done. There's no reason I should have to turn all the settings so far down that it looks like a game from 5 years ago just to get playable framerate. Not when I can get better framerate with better quality on every other game I own. And the loading times for each level are just insane. Sitting around waiting for the menu screen to load is just poor programming.

*Dark0ne selects Peregrine's name* /fart LoLs0r It's ok, Dark0ne. It's not your fault you fell for all the hype about blizzard and warcraft. And as for the monthly fee issue, it's not paying for a game that I object to. I easily spend that much (and more) on pizza every month just because I don't feel like dining hall food. But if I'm going to be paying $15 a month for a game, I expect much better than yet another generic, over-hyped mmorpg.

Not really. Adding the dual and double-bladed lightsabers alone makes it clearly better, the two combat styles are just that much fun. And having the ability to use both dark and light force powers is a nice change. Add in a full single player game (one that I think has better missions than the original) and it's worth buying. It might not be the most unique sequel ever, but it's a fun one.

Terrible, most over rated game right now. Take all of the flaws of an MMORPG, add disgustingly cartoonish graphics, demand a monthly fee, and sell it based entirely on the "Warcraft" name and you have WoW. Just burn $50 a month, you'll get the same results and won't suffer its terrible gameplay.

Probably the better quote would've been Dark0ne's "NO RELIGION DEBATES ON MY FORUM" rule. Of course that's just his "Peregrine must be silenced if he disagrees with me" rule, so this thread isn't getting locked any time soon.

The final reward for completing all the Morag Tong quests. It's a daedric dagger with a 300-750 point (over time) drain health enchantment. Kills anything except gods in one hit, and makes you immune to damage while they die. Add in sneak/chameleon and you're invulnerable.

Three words: Black Hands Dagger.

No. It is not possible to make a MMORPG that is actually good. Therefore Bethesda's hypothetical game would be unimpressive and generic at best. At best, a MMORPG can be a decent hack & slash game suitable for random monster slaying. This would be the exact opposite of Morrowind (and hopefully Oblivion!), and would be so different it would be Elder Scrolls in name only. A lot. LAN/IP multiplayer with a small group of friends would be a ton of fun. Unfortunately, the engine changes required to support it would divert attention from making a quality single player game, so I agree with the decision to leave it out.