Jump to content

DonBilbo

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    68

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by DonBilbo

    Multiplayer

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    6 hours ago, YourDaddyIsShoes said:

    P.P.S. Not to be devils advocate but I have to mention to you tho, women can be GAY too...  It's sometimes hard for me to rally behind a comment I completely agree with when the commenter says shit thats so ignorant and closed minded that its on the verge of being rude to both women and gays at the same time. lmfao... so hey we're not all perfect... actually none of us are. so I do hope the sadfuk without friends and the shit attitude gets a friend someday and I hope you start become aware of the ignorant things you say about people who are in the throes of the touchy subject crowds as of late... 

     

    Like i said, I agree with you 100% besides when you asked how it makes people gay by using a software... what about the women... yada yada boolshite... cuz Women can also be gay, don't exclude people... Not when its about gaming in any sense... except denuvo, their entire trashcan staff and anyone who supports them for invading our private space and our PCs and lives by taking ownership of things we purchaseed from us and acting greedy. They cried about 90-97% sales losses via piracy without DRMs and then with them and especially Denuvo, they havent had any change in sales numbers as opposed to before during the days when pirates took away their livelyhoods...

    They can be excluded... From gaming. 

     

    Other than those doucheknuckles gaming is for everyone, So be mindful of your own ignorance, even when its meant to defend, it can come across as something completley opposite.

     

    PEACE n Sailin the Seas!!!

    You are right. In German gay is only used for men and lesbian for women. It escaped me at that moment that the word gay stands for both genders in English. Language details. 

    Multiplayer

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    3 hours ago, OgreCommander said:

    From what I've seen in recent years from similar games i.e. Wasteland 3, DOS 1&2, and BG3.  The multiplayer hasn't diminished the single player experience, with the exception of not having having all the companions available (meaning that another player usually takes a spot away from a companion).  Wasteland 3 just gave you another group, which is how I see JA3's co-op happening.  Each player controls a squad of mercs.  PvP wouldn't keep my attention for very long, so I personally wouldn't want that as the only MP mode (I think it would be similar to XCOM 2's multiplayer which I didn't find that fun).  But that doesn't mean you have to play the same way in co-op; Wasteland 3 allowed the party to disagree with each other, and even start rumors about the other squad.  Allowing the squads to work independently of one another, except for a few key battles where both are required could be interesting.  Well that's my two cents.

    I am curious to see how they handle coop. Will they allow to create 2 IMP characters so both can play as themselves? Will it even be possible to play coop with more than 2 players? Can player control members of the same squad or does every player need to make his own squad? So many questions. I am looking forward to get more info on coop in the upcoming weeks.

    Multiplayer

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by DonBilbo

    3 hours ago, DougS2K said:

    Would have liked to have seen that time and effort go into something else though.

    That’s usually not the way game development works (maybe with the exception of very small teams where everyone does several different things/all). In bigger teams everyone has a specific role. They probably hired one or several people to implement multiplayer/coop functionality in their games (I am not familiar with their previous games and if they have multiplayer/coop). Telling these people to not do coop but to invest their time in asset creation or design gameplay mechanics would probably not make for a better game. You’d hire more people specifically with expertise in this field if you want expand or schedule more time for the existing team to implement more.

    You don’t tell a cook he is a car mechanic now 😉

    Multiplayer

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    What do you have against coop? There are already so little that support that function in TBS genre. I like to play coop with a friend as we did with DOS, DOS2, Wasteland 3 and soon BG3 and JA3. I don’t think the coop feature of the mentioned games made them any worse.

    And why is some gay by using a software? What about the women who use it? That’s really intellectually undemanding and doesn’t help the discussion. If you don’t use it, so be it. Why don’t let others have fun with it?

    • Like 1

    Rate the game.

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Could be a 8-9/10. I see a lot of similarities to JA2, but also some changes. Some might be for the better some for the worse. It doesn’t have to be an exact copy of JA2 with better graphics to be a good game in my book, but I will wait with my final verdict after I played it at least once.

    JA3 Features Poll

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    25 minutes ago, ShadowMagic said:

    Almost checked them all 😞 

    I expected JA3 becoming nothing more than an Isometric - straight to the point rework of JA2 with a new storyline, but the more I get to read and see (especially the awful art style, 3rd person / zoom view and unrecognizable characters) the less enthousiastic I get.

     

    Perhaps time to move on and stop spilling my salt here 😄

    Do you know Urban Strife already? I know it’s different in many regards as JA, but I like the art style, which is a closer modernization of the JA style as I would have imagined it.

    JA3 Features Poll

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    23 hours ago, Elite77 said:

    Like you.

    🤣

    Thank you for confirming my point. However, I would have preferred a reasonable exchange rather than personal attacks just because you can't provide arguments/reasons.
    I will now put you on the ignore list. I bet you will still respond to this with a snide comment. I won't be able to read it though. You'll probably do it anyway.

    JA3 Features Poll

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I'm beginning to understand why the developers rarely show up here and interact relatively little with the community. From what I've read here lately, I can only shake my head.
    It's really sad. Instead of trying to exchange ideas in a civilised manner and possibly enter into a dialogue with the developers, the low-level internet discussion culture is once again very much in evidence here. I had hoped/expected to find a different discussion culture in a somewhat smaller community of a rather demanding game.

    The sad thing is that it is a few very active members who make the forum largely worthless.

    • Like 5

    JA3 Features Poll

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    @Elite77

    1. Overgeneralization: You assume that any criticism you make, as long as it is not generic, automatically qualifies as constructive criticism. However, constructive criticism involves providing specific suggestions or improvements rather than just expressing dissatisfaction.

    2. Lack of evidence: You make claims about the new additions being terrible but don’t provide any concrete examples or evidence to support your opinion. This weakens your argument and leaves it open to interpretation.

    3. Subjective judgment: Your opinion on what constitutes a "good step" is based on your personal preference and subjective assessment. While you are entitled to your opinion, it weakens your argument when you don't provide objective criteria or explain how these additions deviate from the desired game experience.

    4. Ignoring potential complexity: You suggest that the new abilities in JA3, such as "take cover" or "fire on next turn," are not good steps and that the game should remain simplistic like JA2. However, they fail to acknowledge that introducing new mechanics and abilities can enhance gameplay and provide more strategic depth, appealing to a broader range of player.

    Please argue sensibly, otherwise there will be no meaningful exchange. And thus also no potential constructive criticism.

    JA3 Features Poll

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    46 minutes ago, Elite77 said:

    abilities like take cover, run and gun (where you fire your SMG while moving through an area, not sure if that's an amazing ability, or like something which isn't anything more than a gimmick), etc.

    I don’t know if these abilities work out with the game yet, but why so negative upfront about new features? Is it bad to add some new stuff that may add some  more tactical options for combat. I mean taking cover and shooting while crossing an area doesn’t sound unrealistic to me. I will wait and see if they are useful in combat for me otherwise I just won’t use them.  I understand that many here have a precise idea of what a perfect successor to JA2 should look like, and that doesn't mean that one shouldn't express (constructive) criticism of what has beenseen, but a little more openness towards innovations couldn't hurt some here either.

    Inventory system poll.

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    While I don‘t think they found the optimal compromise yet I don’t think a system like 1.13 makes sense - in this game. Because if you add so much depth to one aspect you need to adapt other gameplay mechanics and aspects as well so it’s overall still balanced. Also this is not a simulation of reality otherwise the TBS aspect wouldn’t also make sense in the first place. This is a game and it’s supposed to make fun for what is focuses on - the quirky characters and the battlefield tactics. I don’t see a heavy focus on inventory management fits to the rest of the game and what I have seen so far I think I can live with that even though a little bit more magazine and bandage management per merc would also be fine for me. So I guess Option 2 would be best. But I'd rather take option 1 than 3 if I can't have 2.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...