mastroego

Me too. Also, the resolution defaults to the second monitor's. Reported months ago. No reply unfortunately.

[quote who="Chibiabos" reply="8" id="3258174"] Every geologist I know, and i know a few as I have an aspiring interest myself (but don't pretend to be anything beyond a novice fan), would have said the same thing -- as rare as earthquakes are, it is extremely rare for a small earthquake to be a precursor to a larger one, to the point no geologist I know would consider it a sufficient risk to ever say anything even vaguely like "there may be a larger earthquake to follow." If as

Sorry, no, the story is wrong. Our judges are crazy but not THAT crazy. It's not about "not predicting", it's about "miscommunicating". They "reassured" the people that there was no "particular reason" to expect a major earthquake; people interpreted that as "it's safe to go home", and they did go home, even to the ones that were unsafe (for no fault of the scientists) Of course *I don't think* they should have been found guilty, but it's true t

Hmm, good question. I fear many newcomers won't even notice that there IS a campaign... I know it works like a mod but still it's too easy to miss it. As a "foreigner" I also would have liked subtitles (I can read English well but listening to it I lose something here and there). Anyway, the fact that I'm trying the campaign at all is good news, as I first thought I'd skip it. Presentation is really nice this time around :)

While I still disagree about some aspects of FE's design, there's is no doubt that Brad knows how to run a business and gain respect from his audience. Stardock has set a great precedent here, I hope it gets the recognition it deserves. :)

I have 3 (three!) different mods just to address Skyrim's UI. SkyUI, Better Sorting, and Categorized Favorites Menu. Without these three, frankly I wouldn't be playing it, in all likelihood. Skyrim really is a weird beast. If it was for the UI, it should have tanked. Hard. I still hate that every time I want to add a perk, I have to cycle through *ALL* the abilities.... But moddability saved it.

@Nomorebeef: You raise valid points but frankly I think at this point Stardock needs to release it. Yes, I mean for financial reasons. We all agree they did an awesome thing (give FE for free to WoM early buyers), but that's going to take a toll in the end. It's been 2 years of development, with a good chunk of the target audience not going to pay for the product either way . It all seemed to speed up when they announced the availabilty o

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="69" id="3252379"] I would rather have tactical battles that are sophisticated enough to be satisfying but not so sophisticated that the computer players can't fight them effectively. I think Fallen Enchantress strikes that balance. ... But in Fallen Enchantress, if I might be so bold, you can set your units to auto-play and know that the computer players will play it competently. Maybe not as good as an expert playe

[quote who="Frogboy" reply="52" id="3252260"] Regarding the tactical battle discussion, it's a very tight balance there. Because the game should be won and lost based on the civilization you've constructed over hundreds of turns, not how well you use your units in tactical battles. As some of you know, I lobbied for terrain and other elements in tactical battles and was ultimately convinced that this would simply result in the game boiling down to who had mastered the

As a proud Skyrim player, I can handle the odd crash here and there (still, some are more touchy on the matter, and let's remember FE has something to prove here after WoM). I'd be more concerned about save consistency, myself.

[quote who="Tuidjy" reply="30" id="3251241"]I am sure that I am in the minority, but I have to say that I hate this. Magical energy necessary to change 100kg of dirt into mud: 8 Magical energy necessary to raise thousands upon thousands of tons from the bottom of the ocean: 5 [/quote] I agree. As a general rule, things that make little sense break immersion (for me at least). FE used to have a lot of those... many have been eradicated, but some remain and/or are

This is really good news. And I'm really hopeful about the other fix about performance. I've been following at a distance lately and I have to say these two "upgrades" (which are more important than some people think, I believe) give good reason to hope for the future of the franchise. It seems right now we might expect a really solid game with two areas that will still need some work: -Tactical battles ( most agree they lack "something") -Magic ( so

Even sooner than I expected, but maybe it really is the time to call it. I think I'll wait till release to try another round, maybe I'll get a better perspective. I'm curious to see what happens with FE after 1.0, both "officially" and mod-wise.

I've been experiencing massive FPS drops since the very beginning. I'm not sure the crowds will react happily to heavy FPS drops, no matter how legitimate the cause: people will assume that a powerful PC + GPU combo should be enough to handle a strategy game. Maybe it could be made clearer which settings to adjust in order to mitigate the problem, since being forced to cloth-map only is un-cool (despite the cloth map being cute!)

I've heard the transformer unit has a lifetime of about 10 years, average. Also the arrays themselves get damaged, lose efficiency, sometimes get stolen and so on. Also, interests, as Jafo said. Of course, it depends a lot on exposure to direct light, but for the average user, it's usually a net loss (even though advertisements don't push this notion). BUT, it's a good thing there are pioneers who take the "ri

[quote who="DsRaider" reply="130" id="3242267"]One idea that occurs to me is to make champions have to be respawned via the build queue upon death. With higher level ones requiring more production. Thus you would need high level cities for high level champions, although only if they die.[/quote] This is a very neat idea. Didn't Warcraft III have something like this? You'd need the town spending lore, resources, maybe essence or something to rejuvenate the hero. It'd limit

[quote who="Tim-Bur" reply="143" id="3241210"]And I strongly second Malsqueek's comments.[/quote] And I strongly "third" them. Also [e digicons]k1[/e] Karma to Malsqueek again because he can put into words things I perceive too but cannot explain so clearly. :)

[quote who="taltamir" reply="101" id="3240238"] Are you really arguing that skyrim UI is not horribad? That the AI doesn't suck? That combat is not horribly unbalanced? That the game wasn't unplayably buggy on the PS3 at lunch?[/quote] Skyrim's UI is a freakin' disaster, worst UI ever really, but, first, it needs to run on consoles too, second, the modding community is so large and dependable that you could count on a "fix" within the first month from release. At

[quote who="taltamir" reply="88" id="3239972"] Speaking of, there is also the cool factor, skyrim has a ton of flaws that would have ruined most other games as it is a dismal failure on every single aspect of polish except bugginess on the PC (while being unplayable buggy on the PS3) and yet it sold like hotcakes because: 1. People were really hard up for another epic RPG adventure, this is something FE should benefit from this too since its been a while since something

I understand hearing people complaining still about the state of the game can be annoying. We don't do it out of spite. I personally am just giving my honest, unfiltered opinion. I like a lot of the game concepts, I really, really like the graphics (fresh and unique), I praise moddability, I love the cloth map and many other things. It's not even about FE being "completed" or not. It's just that I don't agree about how some of the features have been conceived and/or im

[quote who="Simplicity123" reply="96" id="3237248"] 10) Tech tree. Debate-able. Man, I hate the magic tree. I *hate* the magic tree. Civ tree is fun. I wish spell levels for sovereigns/champions were linked to the MAGIC TREE. How sensical would that be? And not to level ups. It'd give me a reason to research the dang thing. [/quote] Many times throughout WoM's and FE's development I've had this image formi

Well, maybe the campaign is perfectly paced, balanced and polished already and has no bugs, therefore needs no testing... Sure it's another "WTF?" move from Stardock, but I can't really fault them for this one, after all the real target audience isn't really interested in the campaign. Yet, if that fails and sandbox fails too, we have a "nobody's happy" scenario once again. And I feel quite the same as Sentinemodo about the state of the sandbox game right now.

On a business level, I entirely see why it should be released sooner rather than later. It's been 2 years already for a game promised as a "gift" to a big chunk of the target audience. Seriously, it's a miracle already, in this regard. And the game does offer a "great first impression" this time around, I mean, unlike EWoM. It might even be enough to get good scores, after all reviewers will just play it once or twice. Commercially speaking, releasing it soon might just work. </p

[quote who="Trojasmic" reply="18" id="3235258"] BUT I ALSO THINK THEY ARE PROBABLY GETTING BURNED OUT BY NOW AND WANT TO RELEASE THIS BAD BOY SO THEY CAN DO SOMETHING ELSE (emphasis added). After all, they've been listening to us nag for 4+ years now. [/quote] True but it's not our fault. It's not even that we like to bitch and moan whatever we get. Take for instance the release of Legend of Grimrock. I have nothing but praise for

I think too many aspects of the game have been rectified (or improved) through an excessively painful process. Too many things that should have been implemented differently from the get go had to be "force-changed" by the sheer force of negative feedback, like many UI "features" which started out so wrong that fixing them must have cost triple the pain. This "longer than ideal road" has had its impact on the company, I guess. Maybe they're somewhat tire