You post this image enough I'd think you were a walking advertisement.Anthraxus said:-annoyingly consistent-
You post this image enough I'd think you were a walking advertisement.Anthraxus said:-annoyingly consistent-
Yes...because limited what someone can say is totally the right course of action....Anthraxus said:Yea, Khar doesn't even deserve any responses any more. He's the epitome of a newshit rpg fan. Even the final fantasy 7 or diablow fandom back in mid-90s weren't as disgusting and humiliating to be associated with as these 'role players' of today.
They limited rings to 1 because of the ability to dual enchant items. One ring in Skyrim = two rings in past games.mParadox said:Really tiny, super tiny gripe here. But it's relevant. Ish.
Why can't we equip more than one rings? D:
We have 5 fingers on each hand, at least let us have one on each. I mean, dude. Not asking for a fabulous Dovahkiin. Just a more practical one.
I don't even like Final Fantasy 7, Diablo is pretty fun, though I don't particularly care for it, and even I think that was uncalled for.Anthraxus said:Yea, Khar doesn't even deserve any responses any more. He's the epitome of a newshit rpg fan. Even the final fantasy 7 or diablow fandom back in mid-90s weren't as disgusting and humiliating to be associated with as these 'role players' of today.
'tis true, it'll be over powered. Eventually. You sure as hell can't dual enchant early in game.SajuukKhar said:They limited rings to 1 because of the ability to dual enchant items. One ring in Skyrim = two rings in past games.
Having two rings would mean 4 enchantments, which would be seriously game breakingly overpowered.
SajuukKhar said:wtf did i just read?Anthraxus said:I doubt you understand ANYTHING about the plot of Skyrim, I doubt you know what CHIM is, or what The towers are, or mantling, or the truth behind Talos, of how Lorkhan is Akatosh and what that really means.
Your judging a story that your missing 90% of.
Furthermore neither Vampire or Planescpae had great stories, they were full of terrible cliche and badp lto twists. Vamprie had one of the worst endings in video games I can think of... "the think you were trying to get was really a bomb the whole time" and you kill yourself in several endings, or let someone else take the bomb to the face.
Funny because all of his games are full of terribly cliches.
Every Fallout Villain ever is a stereotypical cliche.
Furthermore neither Vampire or Planescpae had great stories
neither Vampire or Planescpae had great stories
wow was going to answer you, but fuck man you are either a troll, or really blind fanboy, no one in their sane mind can say planescape had a crappy story
well thats a bit better at least, so heres my answer to your other post:SajuukKhar said:Not having a great story =/= having a crappy story.
They had good stories, but I didn't find them to be these masterpieces of literature that deserve to help up for all time.
Witcher 2 was good though.
they make better quest stories overall(in my opinion).SajuukKhar said:Why Obsidian?sonofliber said:spears, and give it to obsidian for new dlc content
So they can make it MORE buggy then Bethesda does?
So they can make every characters "thought out" but at the same time give you some idiotic series of speech options that lets you make the badguy suddenly drop his entire life's goal and join you?
So they can fill it with half-finished ideas, such as New Vegas's disguise system, that were clearly not thought-out beyond the initial phase?
Ohh yeah did I mention it would be more buggy the Bethesda's releases?