Thoreai
-
Posts
815 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Thoreai
-
-
Dosent change anything about why i should have an internet connection to play the game i bought..you practially say people who dont have an internet connection or dont have a constant connection should just F-off and go back to 2001..now that's really a great point.
Ironically enough, you quoted the exact post in which I said the exact opposite of what you're claiming I said. Here's the quote, and I'll bold it so you know what to read.
If you read properly, you'd see I said that people should go back to 2001 if they can go without internet access at home, not that you should go back to 2001 if you don't want to use Steam. Ironically, it seems most people ignored the news article I quoted that spoke about the drastic changes being made to the Steam download system, which pretty much would solve most of the problems stated in these 'valid points' you speak of.
Personally, I can't go a day without my internet, and seeing as it's become such an extension of our daily lives, I can't see why anyone can complain about having to have internet.
So anyone who has limited internet or no internet at all makes him practically a person who can go back to 2001 and live without an internet connection ? :)
This is such a single point view, there are people who arent that lucky as you to have a constant internet connection but they are interested to buy a game they like but becouse it needs always a steam check, they cant and that in your point makes them someone who loves to be without internet...uhh.
As you said yourself you are so used to have internet that you cant immagine not to have it, now try to immagine that suddenly you are without a connection and left with a game you paid for but cant play, i doubt you would be happy about that.
Choice...its about to have a choice.
-
Also, for the ridiculous people out there who refuse to think bandwidth is an issue in this day and age, consider big inner-cities. Many of the people that live in these areas do not have high speed internet and are reduced to dial-up or satellite internet because the infrastructure cannot support anything else. It IS still an issue for thousands of people.
Har har har. Assumptions much?
Do you know the state of internet in my country? It's pathetic. I'm paying the equivalent of $30 for an uncapped 384mbs connection, where I'm shaped to hell and back, and if I use more than 10gb a week, they throttle my internet until I'm crawling around like 56k. My line speed is standard, unthrottled, 40kb/s max download speed, 12kb/s max upload speed. Before I got this uncapped account, which I got on special (reduced price for the rest of the time I'm subscribed, but there was only 100 accounts available), I sat with a 2gb bandwidth limit, and I STILL loved Steam. I understand bandwidth issues. First world countries really have nothing to complain about.
Totaly agree that steam should be optional, i dont see a reason why should i have always an internet connection to play a game i bought...saying things that we could just go back to 2001 has absolutely nothing to do with and i see it as a desperate reason to counter some valid points that people brought up here.
If you read properly, you'd see I said that people should go back to 2001 if they can go without internet access at home, not that you should go back to 2001 if you don't want to use Steam. Ironically, it seems most people ignored the news article I quoted that spoke about the drastic changes being made to the Steam download system, which pretty much would solve most of the problems stated in these 'valid points' you speak of.
Dosent change anything about why i should have an internet connection to play the game i bought..you practially say people who dont have an internet connection or dont have a constant connection should just F-off and go back to 2001..now that's really a great point.
I tell you why there are people that dont like steam...for a simple reason...choice, if i cant make my own choice if to choose or not steam then it means im being forced even though i spent money on the game, wich should be enough reason why i should be able to play anytime, anywhere and without internet connection.
-
Totaly agree that steam should be optional, i dont see a reason why should i have always an internet connection to play a game i bought...saying things that we could just go back to 2001 has absolutely nothing to do with and i see it as a desperate reason to counter some valid points that people brought up here.
Anything can happen that can make your connection not to function, go down or whatever...and then you are left with a game that you bought but cant play...that's indeed a step forward.
-
I agree people are seriously overreacting here, dont let your pc gamer ego get the better of you, i think they will do just fine even if there might be some problems...there is nothing a modder cant fix, unless it's really something in the core of the game.
I hope this thread get's closed before the trolling and whining startt's :wallbash:
-
I have to say that even though im hyped about this game, i cant shake away that strange feeling that we will get something very similiar to oblivion.
I agree with you, the journalists are basically jumping on everything that Todd Howard says without asking important questions... how do those changes going to influence the game/quests?
Maybe i just got somewhat alergic but everytime i hear "radiant..." i want to run away, it looks to me, just like you said, that even though you can get the quest in different ways, the core of it will remain allways the same and this topic brings this on spot.
-
Yes there is a way, just unrar the file and navigate to the data>meshes>characters>_male.
There are all the animation files, since you want to replace only the idle animations, copy all files that have IDLE written on them to Oblivion>data>meshes>characters>_male, also dont forget to back up your _male folder before you do any changes, this way you can experiment and get interesting stances.
-
Why would anyone threathen an awesome site like this? D:
Because the only constructive social skill is empathy and empathy has to be taught. Yet empathy is given the least priority in developmental education. Now my generation is reaping what it has sowed and, I have to say that we (of my generation) really have it coming to us. It's a pity that so few of use are sufficiently intelligent to learn from our most grievous error. Feel free to marvel at my complete lack of empathy for the willing participant(s) of this sorry farce - and see the true face of my generation as a whole.
Empathy is easy to teach. It starts with a question something like this:
How would you like it if it was done to you?How hard is that? But I rarely, if ever, hear this kind of question asked.
Maybe, if we were to examine the feelings of those involved (instead of judging them, as I just did), we might be able to understand the more immediate mechanisms that drive people to antisocial forms of behaviour - whether it is destroying things that other people cherish, or being a little too eager to serve up "justice". After all, is it not "justice" that the antagonist of this little episode (i.e. the one that got banned) is striving for? On the one hand I can pass the judgement that, in accordance with the provisions and definition of universal suffrage, one man's justice is meagrely another man's revenge. But in my experience, on the other hand, whenever people find themselves seduced by antisocial equivocations such as "justice", it is far, far more effective to ask the question:
How would you like it if it was done to you?And yes, some people need attention. In case anyone was wondering, attention is a legitimate human need, but judging a person for not effectively going about getting that need met or, worse still, for having that need in the first place (as someone may have done a bit earlier on this thread), is simply not constructive. Moreover, judging a person for having a need we don't share is a vilification of the entire community that does share that need - and, if I understand the motivation behind anti-vilification laws, this kind of behaviour is no longer considered socially acceptable.
However, what makes people that have learned empathy truly "wealthy" (i.e. in the social sense), is that having empathy as a skill guarantees that you know the two most important things in life:
- What your most important emotional needs are &
- How to go about getting your needs met symbiotically (meaning that, for both parties, giving and receiving are both mandatory parts of any sustainable relationship - because everyone has the equally reasonable expectation to be happy)
This is not to discourage self defense. However, the reason we all wind up having to defend our interests against people who don't give a damn over and over and over again (like a cracked record) is because the children get taught how to judge the feelings of others instead of being taught to understand the feelings of others. The consequence of this judgemental corruption of the education system is that it sets people to seek "justice" (i.e. revenge) for their setbacks and far too many wind up feeling "justified" in attempting to prosper unsymbiotically (as compensation for those setbacks) - and when some can't have their unsymbiotic and "just" deserts, they then choose to seek their "justice" more directly - and go on a rampage. Whether or not people get hurt, the underlying mechanism and cause remain the same.
So, we can still be playing the same old cracked record in 50 years (when it will be getting really old and boring for those of us still alive) or we can try to apply some social pressure where it counts and start pressing antisocial people with the question:
How would you like it if it was done to you?Who knows? If we can make the anti-social people as sick and tired of that question as some of us are of having to repeatedly defend our interests, maybe they'll discover what they really need and desist from their pestering for the sake of doing something more fulfilling.
However, the cynic in me would conclude this rant by saying that, of course, I'll get down from my soap box - but first, I think, I need to stop swinging from the rafters...
Wonderfully written and sadly true.
Im not on the side of such people but spoken in generall, its true that people are very quick to pass judgment upon others and empathy is something that very few know.
Ironicaly anti-social people are the result of social people that look for a bit of empathy, acceptance, but since most of them arent in the typical sheep social sfere they get none, thus making them lonely looking for a bit of attention and depending on their strength of dealing with such things they either do problems or hide even more from social life.
Now this may not be the case of this person, but there is a bit of it in there i would say.
Anyway im really glad nothing happened to nexus :thumbsup:
-
Thank you for the info! :woot: :woot: :woot: :woot:
-
I have been keeping fairly up to date on anything Bethesda lets slip and have not heard any word on vampirism or lycanthropy. Werewolves are confirmed as enemies but whether or not you can become inflicted is to be determined but after the popularity of lycanthropy in Bloodmoon and vampirism in previous Elder Scrolls titles they would catch a lot of flak for not adding it so I assume they will. Also if you read up on the lore of the vampires in Skyrim they sound like much nastier enemies than the Cyrodiilic vampires.
That would be so great, especially playng as werewolf would fit the cold and deadly enviroment of Skyrim nicely...i really hope you are right :thumbsup:
-
Im unsure about the spriggan, though i would like to see some diversity in the skyrim creature repertoire, i really hope it wont end up the same as oblivion...dungeon>undead nords>spider>maybe a gaint...so far we havent saw many creatures, but i guess its still too early and we could be surprised.
Just for the sake of diversity i say.. yes i want to see spriggans :biggrin:
-
Where exactly is there something about skyrim, i see there a vid where it says skyrim but nothing from skyrim is shown. :unsure:
You can go to their main page (http://www.gametrailers.com/), scroll down a bit in the "Newest Media" section till you see a picture of the dragonborn from the trailer. At least I think that is the one.
The things that I hadn't heard before is that there is a shout allows you to breath fire. And no playing as a dragon, although that wasn't much of a surprise. No new footage or images.
Thank you ITOS :)
Well i guess it was too good to be true to become a dragon, but breathing fire sounds cool ! :biggrin:
-
Awww :confused:
Anyway thank you, i somehow felt there will be nothing new added, but i hoped...pff :down:
They have no clue how such things destroy their fans health D:
-
Where exactly is there something about skyrim, i see there a vid where it says skyrim but nothing from skyrim is shown. :unsure:
-
If you write in the search THIEF or SNEAK, STEALTH, there are a few things to be found.
Overall there isnt really much that would make the thief roleplayng better as far as i know, there was a mod where you got a set of arrows that could flame out torches when shooting at them, but i cant remember the name.
-
The changes in attributes don't worry me so much, and from what I've read in the recent articles it seems like they have made a very good game for us.
However, the part about how everyone laughed when Todd killed a guard with a headshot and the other guard standing less than three feet away looked at it and then said "I know I heard something"..... now that to me seems like it could be a little indication that the devs should spend some time tweaking the new ai some more :tongue:
I got worried about that too, sounds oblivion-like style, where in oblvion npcs had psychic powers, in skyrim they will be "i knew i heard something", when a corpse of their fellow falls down near him...well we could see it as a step forward..but i dont know xD
I seriously hope its not like that, or it will destroy the immersion completely. :down:
-
I like this change, as i think it makes the leveling much more believable and not really simpler.
You still need to use the weapons/spells/skills you want to get better in...its like in real life...if you use something often you get better at it, but you dont have to put 10 points in something just to jump 10 feet higher and also it prevents people from messing up their character by choosing wrong at the start of the game.
I like the idea that your action determines what you are and not the choices at the beginning or pre-determined classes and with so many perks this basically calls out for uniqueness.
-
Some very interesting info about magic that I didn't see in the first post:
"he put together a fire spell with an area-of-effect shockwave to add a fire effect to the radial blast. I didn't get a sense of how many different spells will be compatible with each other, but this looks like a pretty fun system to play around with". (source)
"In one hand, he equipped the circle of protection, which warded off the undead foes; in the other, he equipped chain lighting, which blasted foes to pieces. Between how they looked and operated, the magical abilities in Skyrim reminded us of the plasmids in the BioShock series. One of the ways our character could learn new spells was by collecting magical tomes". (source)
Good post, with source and everything.
I think this will be a new and cool system to play with, atleast in a fantasy rpg. However, i really hate how this make magic look. Magic, by comparison to other games/worlds and even to TES itself, is not something that a mage "equips" in one hand to be cast until some other spell is "equipt" in that hand. Magic is the will of the caster manifesting itself on the environment. The mage chooses the appropriate spell and then casts it. This takes planning and focus, which is maintained and aided by hand gestures and sounds.
I realise that the game mechanic is similar in both cases, you choose the spell and then cast it. But the two approches creates large differences as to what magic is and how it works in the game world. If it turns out that my mage in skyrim will be running around with a flaming fist (not a BG reference hehe) as long as any fire type spell is "equiped" then i might not even buy the game at all.
I have been worried about this too...so far Beth wasnt able to make magic feel like real magic..and after i saw the vid where was the burning hand i got a feeling they wont be able to do that this time aswell, it will be the same as in oblivion it seems.
With equiping magic in the hand im still ok as we could say the character is focusing power into his hands but the casting animation is exactly the same style as in oblivion, point and puff point and puff :confused:
-
I was thinking of the beauty of the wild or that kind of thing, haha. But yeah, I like the crouching sense of the kahjiits in Morrowind better. Always seem ready to pounce,
Hehe thats true, hopefully now they will be...khajiits...finally. :laugh:
Now im really really curious about Argonians :D
Khajiit looks far more ferocious now. I hope there will still be some... Less evil looking ones. :P
Also, man how the orcs have changed. Much more narrow heads and dark green. Improvement.
Also, how can skeletons have beards? A skeleton in the screenie with skellies has a beard... :)
Textures was another thing I noticed. Much more detailed... Excellent.
Oh yeah, and that lady person leaning on the wooden railling. Finally some good interaction with the environments!
Skeletons can have them, hair has a very long life time...there are many hundred year old mummies that have whole hair on them...not sure about beards though...hmm.
Also they are skeletons but it seems they still have skin on them so that would explain why.
-
I dont think they were supposed to be pretty but they did not fit in with how they were done, basicaly it was a human body with a cat/lizard/orc head...not wery believeable.
Now finally the orcs look really intimidating as they should and same with Khajiits, im unsure though if they use some other body type specially for those races...still its a big jump forward. :thumbsup:
-
Horse mounts are confirmed, if i understood it right, they also plan on selling horse armor like in Oblivion.
Also they are considering dragon mounts.. :woot: :woot:
http://www.gamepro.com/article/previews/218905/skyrim-preview-cont/
-
"There's no decision yet on mounts or difficulty levels. Inquiries about guilds, factions, alchemy and crime are all batted away. We do at least find out that you can buy property, and Howard hints that some dragons may not be your enemies." - from http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-04-18-the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-preview?page=4
Could it be ..? :teehee: :woot:
-
A comparsion oblivion/skyrim...no comment :)
-
Omg they look fantastic!
I had my doubts about how they will look, now they are gone...especially the orc is so intimidating, exactly how one would immagined them, also the khajiit is great.
Now i cant wait to see even more...god this waiting is a slow death! :wallbash:
-
Bearded female Nords are the way to go...you can have you wo-man and plenty of armor too :laugh:
Skyrim Information
in Skyrim LE
Posted