UndeadNecro

I personally loathe playing games more than once when I've burned it out(aka played it once and am in a "familiar" state with it). For example, I've beaten Chrono Cross once but after that single playthrough, I only get up to half~ before I stop playing. Same goes for lots of other games because I know I'm playing familiar parts over and over and it feels tedious etc. I prefer a walkthrough for a single playthrough if I *need* it or if using a walkthrough provides the player with benefits that are easily missed. Example : Baldur's Gate secret armour, which requires you to play BG 1 and keep the pantaloons, then complete the set in BG2, giving you(AFAIK) the best armour in the game.

I have a very cynical and pessimistic view of the world, specifically that most people are kind of, y'know, assholes. I mean, it's the main 'culture' of the internet and lots of people bash others for not taking part in it or accepting that it's a thing. In real life it's kind of the same thing, except people aren't as open about it. Even for most stuff, you have to really push people over to get what you want otherwise you're just "going with the flow" and for most people that's apparently not good enough. There's also the type of stuff that's skill-based of sorts. Really just bringing this up to complain about the education system and the whole "you can do anything if you put your mind to it." For most people, it's a case of you're either good at X or you're bad at X. Saying someone "isn't smart enough" to become a scientist is asinine but everyone goes with the standard that school education and grades, etc. define who you will be or what you're supposed to do with your life. Point is, there are some many things that still exist that run our lives subtly. Simply put, you can't do a job if you don't have a degree for it and you're not not allowed to learn how to do the job if the school says you're not qualified to do so. So, yeah, the world is pretty fucked in my eyes but I could just be unfortunate or just a really lazy fat vidya gaemr, which I'm *pretty sure* isn't correct.

Morrowind, ohoho. Morrowind definitely. So fucking flawed. I don't even want to go into it, but if someone wants me to, I'll try and write 20 paragraphs on it. Also, if I damn well want to wank off to fictional characters, I damn well will! Not like I can get anyone in real life anyways. :')

Well, actually, it's more like a 15-15-70 bretween guns, people, and bullets, since bullets are the major cause of death in firearm related deaths, via bleeding, lead poisining, ruptured organs, or destroyed brains. . . Ha Ha. Funny joke. Either way, the gun is launched by a contraption know as a "gun" which requires something to pull its trigger to be fired.

Yeah, I'm sort-of with Heliocentrical. I don't vote because I have no interest and I'm not exactly represented. Ever.

Everybody learns, remembers, and adapts differently. This especially applies to trivial information, since trivial information is subjective to everyone. It is very true that the solar system could be irrelevant to many people for many years to come. Why does somebody *have to* learn a specific piece of knowledge? They don't, that's the thing. The way I see it, you learn whatever you need to get from day to day, and then some extra stuff that you choose to learn. I honestly feel like intelligence is taken too literally. Look at the (forgive me, I forget the name) multiple intelligences test and it's a good example of how many different categories of intelligence you can pick out. You can be intelligent in one thing but be very ignorant in another thing. For example, I'm a flop in sports and trades. I'd say that I'm more of a history person with a bit of biology and chemistry, despite not being the most intelligent in those subjects. Does this mean I'm stupid? No. I just, y'know, haven't learned a lot. Hypothetically, anyone can be taught anything. It's just a matter of being taught it in the first place. I find it incredibly elitist when certain jobs / subjects are limited to certain types of people. If you're not willing to try and teach others your own knowledge, what does that say about you? There's also an obvious difference between whether not somebody wants to learn. Intentional ignorance is a bit odd but, honestly, somebody can choose to be ignorant and still not be "stupid". I'm also somebody who can never create a coherent thought that is easy to understand and I'm fully aware of that.

Announcement tweets would probably be the best route to go. Y'know, like "[video title] on Youtube" or "Twitch livestream starting now!"

I suppose this doesn't technically count but I heard on the radio about the lead singer of the band The Tragically Hip was recently diagnosed with terminal brain cancer. That's... Pretty shocking.

My brother plays it, but he's always talked about how he's gotten screwed over and rarely about amazing instances. He keeps trying to get me to play it, too. I'd probably try it if it was free, since it seems like a "cool" time-waster for in-between moments.

You're thinking of the transistor, which is a semi-conductor generally used for fast electrical switching, and is generally associated with computing, but has significant applications in most electronics. Also, technically, it was invented in the Fallout universe, it just took longer. As for the Fallout universe being more advanced than us, keep in mind that they still have 60 years up on us, and honestly, we've surpassed them for the most part already. Outside of certain aspects of nuclear research and robotics (although both are due to the low considerations of safety in the Fallout universe, more than anything). At any rate, by the time we reach 2077 (if we do), we will probably be terrifyingly more advanced than the Fallout universe. To be fair, there's still a lot of uncertainty as to how dormant cultural change was in that period of time. The fact is, we basically know nothing of the hundred years between the end of WW2 and the mid-twenty-first century. Just a few snippets, like the U.S. becoming 13 Commonwealths and still doing the moon landing and stuff. This has lead to some speculation that there was still cultural shifts in that time, but people reverted back to a 50's mentality out of nostalgia in the decades before the war. Afterall, most of Fallout America appears to be a pretty egalitarian place, so something must have happened in terms of civil rights. That being said, there can be arguments made for cultural stasis. Namely, going back to the delayed invention of the transistor, the miniaturization of electronics never happened, meaning that mass communication and democratization of culture didn't happen. Most of the 60's and 70's culture came from the fact that young folks were more easily able to influence cultural tastes due to the greater accessibility of things like transistor radios and instruments and other creative tools. Before then, the parents tended to control media, but ever since, the main audience of media has gotten younger and younger (even to the pre-teens of today). Without this, though, the revolutionary attitudes of youth had more trouble taking hold. Combine all of this with a likely more oppressive government (such as what might have happened had, say, Joseph McCarthy become President), and it becomes a lot easier to control the culture. That being said, most of this is still largely speculation, since again, the last few decades are kinda a Dark Age in terms of Fallout lore (probably on purpose), so it's hard to say what's up. I do have to wonder if things like Classic Rock still existed in other parts of the world (namely, England), and was just banned in the U.S. I can't help but imagine that the government in Fallout would want to squash any sort of "British Invasion" as soon as it could. Right, transistor. That's it. Also, good point. I just interpreted the technology difference as theirs being a slow-crawl before the 21st century and eventually it would've sped up. They do have some significantly more advanced technology in certainly bigger areas, though. That much is true. I can only imagine what a non-nuked Fallout universe could've looked like but I suppose the differences are what makes it great.

Sorry, I had to single this bit out. Sounds like a particularly obscure "Ooze-type" creature from Dungeons & Dragons. I don't think it can be denied that Skyrim has all the hallmarks of stereotypical euro-centric fantasy nation, but I loved this game and I think the franchise writers did an excellent job of adding many interesting characteristics to the culture, flora and fauna of Skyrim. I also appreciated the fact that unlike many fantasy settings, the overwhelmingly nordic quality of the Nords (duh!) didn't instantly relegate them as evil northern barbarians in the services of demonic warlords, like they tend to be in most fictional worlds. One of my main gripes with Skyrim's setting is that it incorporated real world elements into it's fantasy instead of just being an interesting setting. What are the Nords like? Well just imagine vikings and there you go. It's pretty evident that the writers cut corners when it came to creating Skyrim's setting by having real world elements do most their work for them. This has been an issue that has plagued the series since Oblivion. Morrowind isn't grounded in the real world in the slightest. There are no giant mushroom buildings or buildings made out of giant crab shells in the real world. That's one aspect of Morrowind that makes it so interesting. To see just how creative Morrowind's writers were. The fact that the Dragonborn DLC exists for Skyrim shows how little confidence the writers had in Skyrim's own setting.They ran out of creative ideas for what DLC they could come up with so what do they do? Why they go back to Morrowind and use what Morrowind's setting had of course. It's almost as if they're apologizing for sticking you in the most banal setting that the Elder Scrolls series has yet to come up with. Again it's a personal gripe of mine so please take what I say with a grain of salt. That's a very good criticism to have, too. Skyrim, admittedly, had a lot going for it. It's a northern kingdom of snow and ice. They could've had the coolest jump between south-to-north (Falkreath and travelling north really doesn't show that very well) similar to the perma-frost line(I think one of the best examples is North Quebec in Canada?). Winterhold was such a missed opportunity, not to mention the jarl buildings were such jokes. Might as well put everyone in wood huts and put a feather on the one the Jarl lived. Y'know, "aesthetic". I actually expected cool ruined buildings, or some kind of unique architecture, on my first playthrough. Oblivion was, of course, a let down in similar ways. The most noticeable issue being that *all* of the towns followed a strict medieval-fantasy theme, reminiscent of Europe(or that's how I see it, anyways). They could've done a lot more with it. The Imperial City was a good start but even that was kind of plain, albeit the prison was a neat idea but I think having a BIG separate building entered by a long bridge instead of a thin tall tower would've been better. I 'unno, just me. The palace was also kind of... Eh. Bad.

I didn't find either Leyawiin or Bruma very interesting to be honest. My favorite towns in Oblivion were Anvil, Bravil, Skingrad, Cheydinhal and Chorrol. I just loved how each city had different architecture. As for Skyrim It all kind of blurs together into a giant pile of snow, vikings and dragons for me. The only town I liked was Riften specifically because it wasn't covered in snow. Right, yeah, Bravil and Cheydinhal were my favourite, other than Skingrad which was the most central-European themed, I believe? I 'unno, I got that vibe, maybe a German feel to it. Cheydinhal, as I said, was the swampy-town and just had an interesting feel and design to it. Bravil was... The seaside town? I love seasides / ports in fantasy medieval settings. They always have such interesting opportunities, specifically with how interesting imports/exports of people and goods can tend to be. Also, pirate-likes. They're cool.

The Elder Scrolls settings have always been done VERY well, specifically Oblivion and Skyrim, for me. For Oblivion, I feel like the medieval and fantasy themes mixed very well, a good example being Bruma (and whatever the town was that had the fighter's guild quest with the Argonian sap tree), which IIRC was the northern base-of-the-mountain snowy town. Skyrim was just atmospheric overall. The occasional animals you'd see, the amount of foliage they put into the base game(although mods make it AMAZING, just like in Oblivion which is still an amazing experience modded), and the environments themselves. You go from Falkreath, a neat October-town to Dawnstar, a Northern-Europe seaside town. The only thing that could've made it better would have been a more interactive world but, eh, this is Bethesda we're talking about. They put in the bare minimum most of the time. Fallout is also a pretty good theme throughout all of the popular games, albeit the science behind how their technology splits from us is still confusing. How does the resistor(if that's it, I forget either way) not being invented result in their technology being massively more advanced in comparison to ourselves? Also, the fanart for the Fallout games and their settings is *amazing* from what I've seen.

One thing I never understood was how obscure this game was. All I know is that its advertising was very little.

I'd imagine it's because most people don't associate any sort of high technology with the medieval era (not to say there wasn't any, but I mean public perception of idealized eras). That being said, there is something close to that era called Clock-Punk. Full list here: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PunkPunk And hey, no reason new genres can't still be created, right? Well, I started playing Wizardry 8 and that has a mix of space-age technology and medieval architecture, etc.