BTGBullseye

Grats! Looks nice!

I'm not a fan of consoles, but otherwise I agree. You're a man of poor taste so nobody is surprised. And you're incapable of not trying to insult me in particular. I think you need to see someone about your obsession with me. All analog sticks must be in the center of the controller, one right next to the other. The Xbox controller is utter heresy used by perverse deviants that have fallen from the grace of our lord Sony. I mean what in the name of the holy PS2 is going on with it's left analog stick? Okay imagine the Xbox 360's controller scheme as a person's face. Do people normally have their left eyeball over on the leftmost side of their forehead and rotated 45 degrees? No! they don't and why is the d-pad in the left analog stick's spot? It should be in the left portion of the controller as mandated by our lord and savior Sony. For their sins our lord Sony has inflicted seven red rings of death upon the Xbox heretics. They know what they did. Xbox Controllers may be designed by heretics but like the Borg they're atleast somewhat human I think anyway. Nintendo controllers meanwhile are Lovecraftian nightmares constructed by Cthulhu himself and anyone who takes an unfortunate glimpse into the eyes of these unholy manifestations will be forever tainted. At which point there is no salvation for them. I said I wasn't a fan of consoles, so you go on a rant about the various console controllers that I don't particularly like? Really, there are only 2 things that console controllers are better at... Simplified analog joystick input, and an all-in-one control system. Everything else is easier to use mouse+keyboard or dedicated joystick/racing wheel for. What I'm saying is that controllers are good for platforming and simplified racing/flight games, everything else is better served by not going into controller territory. (this is coming from someone who has extensively used every console and controller that has been on the market since the original Atari)

But if all you get is some poster you get to look at somewhere in the game, it really isn't affecting anything... It's an extremely minor visual acknowledgement that "yay, I did something that affects nothing". Which is why I suggested Wasteland 2, as most choices affect the economy, everyone's perception of you, and in some cases limit or expand your options for other interactions with others in the game. (and it feels more like a real consequence for your actions than "you get to see a poster")

I'm not a fan of consoles, but otherwise I agree.

They didn't care. How many different ways can I say this simple sentence? They didn't want to believe that I had what I claimed, and were unwilling to even consider it. I could have literally shoved the design specs and/or math in their faces and then gotten arrested for assault, but they still wouldn't have paid any attention to the science. THEY DIDN'T CARE!!! Please stop trying to find ways to make it my fault that they didn't consider the tech.

You should check out Wasteland 2... The very first mission is choosing between food and water for the entire state, and it seriously affects the gameplay in many ways. (not all are noticeable, but many are) Consequences for choices made in RPGs is one thing that has been sorely lacking in almost all RPGs, and I feel that it seriously pulls me out of immersion when there aren't any consequences or benefits for my actions. (like killing all the bandits across the entire Mojave in Fallout NV, and nothing changes)

As long as it isn't first level Myst... (I never did figure out what I was supposed to do there)

Star Trek Online. It'll be this for the foreseeable future... I'm hosting an event tomorrow for my fleet that basically puts us in sub-par ships, and throws us at difficult enemies for mediocre rewards, just because it's fun.

Guess... It rhymes with Star Trek Online.

They wouldn't've even considered looking at it if I had shown it to them... No point in showing it to people who would rather take a piss on me than acknowledge that I might be smarter than they think they are.

When most space sci-fi/fantasy is based off of Star Trek, Star Trek then appears to be generic to the unintelligent. STO came long before Warframe, but even at it's worst wasn't as bad as Warframe was at its best.

I just thought that was my neighbor getting home from a long night at the bar...

I tend to not talk about it unless the topic comes up... Otherwise it usually ends up with a couple people saying a few minor things about why their religion feels the way it does about something, (extremely rarely in anything but a respectful manner) and then you get a small crowd forming up and screaming that "you're horrible people for even being part of that religion because [insert nonsense extremist view that even the religion they claim to be part of 'condemns' them for]". If the non-religious/atheists weren't such assholes about it, (on average, there are notable exceptions to the rule) there might be more discussion.

Just a thought, but you could try Star Trek Online... All you'd need to do is use solely the free stuff to play against the higher difficulty levels, and I guarantee it to be very hard to beat.

Star Trek Online...

Alaska... You'd get the nice winter landscape, and a host of bizarre critters. Besides, I want to see the real Anchorage in-universe. (my dad was stationed there at one point, so I'm interested in the location) South Dakota. As one of the primary launching locations for nukes, and the least targeted by nukes, and with some of the best protection against windborne fallout, it would make for a nice change to see the mutated and unmutated creature compete for the extensive agricultural resources that would likely still be located there. (it has the absolute best farmland possible in the south-east, as that is all floodplains for the Missouri River) Plus there are all the old nuke silos, a couple military bases, and dozens of dams available for the tech-side of things.

Wasteland 2 is also a large and remarkably varied map... In the first mission you get to go to a dam that's under attack by raiders, or somewhere with genetically engineered and mutated plants that are killing their creators. Or you can skip both, and just go run off and do your own thing. There is an awful lot of stuff in this particular 'wasteland'. lol

You can kill everyone in Wasteland 2... You will die quickly when you try to if you aren't cheating, but it's possible.

http://sto.gamepedia.com/Tribble_(server) I take it this is where you're getting your information? It is 3 years out of date. Apart from special events preceding the release of an expansion, it is accessible only by those with a lifetime or gold subscription. If it's behind a paywall, it's not open to everyone. They weren't 'open', and they weren't listed as such. (nor are they currently) Not ones that you have to pay for. And it's free. Like "you can't access this unless you pay for it", that kind of permission? I linked you to one of them... You just don't understand the concept that a paywall is a restriction. Nor does mine. It just says that there is a restriction between the users and the game that is artificially implemented. (i.e. a paywall) BTW, you still haven't linked your 'source', merely a LMGTFY.

So, because you feel differently, you decide that it's a good idea to become an asshole? I was answering the question asked by the OP to the best of my ability, and trying not to let him fall into a game that has an acerbic community at the best of times, and downright dickish at the worst, has some of the most assholeish devs I've ever met, (and I've met some real asshole devs) the worst level of griefing I've ever seen in a paid game, and the least original setting I've ever seen. When you get to some of the outer areas, there is some variety, but the thrill of seeing them is countered by the fact that it's the first new thing you've seen in 10+ levels, and it's something you've seen in almost every medieval fantasy game. (and the fact that this 'new' thing will be either seen for the next 30 levels and be boring as hell, or it'll be a 1-time thing that really isn't as interesting as it first seemed)

That was the type of 'small' I was referring to. Unless you like the generic fantasy elements present in Runescape, (and they are incredibly generic) combined with the very limited controls, (click to move, click to do default action, right click on NPCs to sometimes be able to do more than the default action, click to attack/defend, use game chat that tends to be less engaging than the 12 year olds screaming in the latest CoD game, etc.) you probly won't consider it a 'deep' game. Bear in mind that I was a paying subscriber for this game for over 2 years, and did virtually everything there was to do.

The Beta isn't open to the public, it's only for paying customers. That's like saying that the Tribble server in Star Trek Online is an Open Beta, even though you have to be a subscriber to access it. Open = Free for anyone, at most a registration process to access it. Closed = Any paywall, limited numbers, or category restrictions on public access to the software.

Here's what that link took me to, and it says exactly what I just got done saying... http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/b/beta.htm Either you need a little better reading comprehension, or you're not capable of understanding. PS: LMGTFY is a total dick move when someone asks for specific links to support your position. (and it apparently backfires for you)

Finished Just Cause 3 a few days ago... Quite fun.

Would you mind providing that link? I've been doing open and closed alphas and betas for close to 10 years, so my information comes from experience.