Game News Pete posts about previous interviews

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I'm left wondering why i bother getting into this type of argument when obviously there is little to no interest in rational discussion of some points.

Then why do you think that it makes sense to seek similarities between 2 very different systems? Even if they exist on some levels, they serve no purpose, not in the context of this discussion and Pete's comment.

Of course they serve a purpose, and they are in context. Try going back and reading the discussion. Hines stated that phasebased with automated pauses was similar to turnbased. You doubted this. I asked you what would be more similar to turnbased, either a full realtime system, or a phasebased system with automated pauses. Instead of an actual answer, you created some poor analogy and confusingly dismissed the whole point with no basis:

Well, he also implied right there that BG combat was also similar to TB. Is there anyone here who thinks that BG with all kinda crap enabled was exactly like/similar to/strongly reminded of TB? Can somebody say that ToEE combat was similar to BG or IWD? Just curious.

Those pauses don't follow the same guidelines as the pauses inherent to turnbased systems, but realtime phasebased with automated pauses - activated under certain conditions - does approximate it to turnbased.

How so?

However, the point is, what would you consider to be closer to turnbased, a purely realtime system, or a system that used pauses (even if they were different from the ones used in pure turnbased)?

What would you consider to be closer to drinking water, wall paint or gasoline? The answer is irrelevant, because no matter which one is technically closer, it can't be used as drinking water.

This is in context of what Hines said, and you were the one questioning his statement. Again you insisted on claiming it wasn't meant to be used as drinking water, when that was not the point. And, if it is irrelevant, then why bother bringing it up so you can later dismiss it instead of providing an actual answer? Now, either you're being exceptionally obtuse, or you're just wasting my time - and everyone's time - by branching the conversation into points which stray away from the original point without giving definite answers on the main issues. Which is it? I'd like to know so i can react accordingly, ie, ignore either attempt.

No, the point was that Pete claimed that
a) KOTOR with autopause is "more of a TB experience"
b) turn-based=round-based
So, it wasn't about some abstract discussion on what's more similar, it was about specific, but false claims.

Did he say turnbased was the same as roundbased in this quote? Or did you assume he meant both were the same because he wasn't willing to go into details explaining the differences? If you want to talk about specific claims, then why do you ignore the part where he clearly stated it wasn't the same as turnbased?

The answers are yep, and pretty much. If you are applying for a job, is there any practical difference between "no, we won't hire you" and "I don't think we will hire you"? Wouldn't you say that both answers are negative no matter what?

No, not really. I don't think anyone in their right mind would, either.

Of course, but there would have been hope and thus more people willing to give Bethesda the often spoken of benefits of the doubts. Some people wouldn't have trusted them, but some people would have. Thus, it would be different.

People already distrusted them, while others believed them, when they made the inital statements. The only difference would be the statement itself, because the over-the-top reactions would still be the same.

And that makes sense why?

He mentioned Baldur's Gate because KoTOR's system derives from it. Would it make more sense to you if he claimed KoTOR's system was built upon that of Temple of Elemental Evil? He mentioned a game, and mentioned another one with a similar combat model. How does this not make sense?

In some cases it's stupid.

Since you apparently can't answer my queestion, i'll ask it again, slightly changed so it's more understandable:

Are you suggesting they're unprofessional by being honest in saying that they are not certain of being able to work with something entirely different, because it's not what they do well?

Saying that was stupid because it served no purpose, reassured nobody, but confirmed the worst fears. Overalll, do you disagree that Pete's involvement made the matters much worse?

Come on, anyone's involvement would have made matters much worse. It doesn't matter if it was Hines or someone else in his place, because those that whine about every single thing he says are the problem. There's no confirmation of so-called worse fears, also. Hines' mistake regarding the combat system was much more innocuous than the statement made by Hayt, as far as i'm concerned. But Hines dared defile the holy corpse of turnbased by suggesting something had similarities with it, so its all doom and gloom. Oh noes!

The answer to the question is yes. Without reaching for a dictionary, professional=competent, experienced, highly skilled. Pete demonstrated neither of these qualities, unless of course he was asked to piss the FO fans off in which case he was very professional.

So basically, you're telling me it's more professional to lie than to tell the truth? Can i get this in paper, preferably signed?

Here is the exact quote for your convinience, since your memory is failing you:
Quote:
Finally, what do you think will be the next big progression in the RPG genre?

Hines: An increased emphasis on immersion and allowing players to play the game any way they want. Obviously the Elder Scrolls has always been about that very thing, but games like KOTOR were great not just because they were fun to play, but because you could have a blast playing as the good guy while your friend was enjoying it as the most evil son-of-a-gun you can imagine. Same game, but completely different experiences and choices that let you customise your experience.

Any questions?

My mistake, because i thought the question made to him was not regarding that. Still, this doesn't change that he is using a successful game, and certain gameplay elements, as an example of what they believe to be important. I don't see how is mentioning KoTOR detrimental to the fanbase, or unprofessional.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Wasn't this the point, Saint? He said they weren't the same, but that they had similarities. Being similar, or carrying similarities, doesn't mean they are the same. Which is why i thought your comment was unecessary.

As for him saying "let's not split hairs", that appeared to be a way of not having message board users go on yet another rampage regarding combat models, which was (is) a recurring theme at their boards. But of course, i am speculating on this one.

Can you simply not read or are you having trouble comprehending what you're reading?? He said phase based sure is similar(direct quote) to turn based, they're NOT similar. Per my original analogy, dogs and cats have similarities, such as being domesticated animals or having four legs, but cats and dogs a're not similar to one another. He also claimed that saying KotOR wasn't turn based is splitting hairs, it's not - they're different. In previous interviews, he's said KotOR was turn based.

But here's the big point, once again, there's a huge difference between being similar and having similarities. I said that yeah, there are similarities, which is not the same thing as saying, phase based sure is similar turn based. Get it?

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

But here's the big point, once again, there's a huge difference between being similar and having similarities.

How exactly, given similar is basically synonymous with having similarities, or characteristics in common? Similar doesn't mean identical, or equal.

If you want to use your original analogy, cats and dogs are similar, not the same. They share characteristics, but are not equals.

 

[StraitLacedDeviant]

Delving the depths of semantics here guys....

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Delving the depths of semantics here guys....

That may be, but implying someone has trouble comprehending what they're reading when the word in question could, in theory, have those meanings, is a sign of bad faith. I've yet to see the word 'similar' having the same use as 'same'. Maybe everyone else has seen it, but i haven't.

 

[StraitLacedDeviant]

Entering territory I should have the sense to leave alone but the subtle levels of the english language aren't quite as clear cut as your saying Saint. Role-player is completely right in his interpretations, "having similarities" and "being similar" is not distinctly different enough for the basis of your argument. As per your argument a dog and cat are similar in the right context. If describing a dog to someone who had never seen one you could easily use "similar to a cat but generally larger, more rigid form and extended jaws."

His chosen interpretation is at least as valid as yours, and not really a point to attack his comprehension of the language.

That said Peter Hines is completely backpeddling and an asshat.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I'm left wondering why i bother getting into this type of argument when obviously there is little to no interest in rational discussion of some points.

Just 'cause you disagree with some points, doesn't mean they are irrational. I'll gladly clarify them for you.

Of course they serve a purpose, and they are in context. Try going back and reading the discussion. Hines stated that phasebased with automated pauses was similar to turnbased. You doubted this.

Of course, I doubted that because they aren't similar. Whatever similarities do exist they are the same as similarities between water and gasoline, which, for the purpose of this discussion, are non-existent. Pete claimed that his gameplay experience was llike that of a TB game. ("I played KOTOR with auto-pause turned on in the options, so that it pauses between each round of combat, thereby turning it into more of a turn-based (or round-based, let's not split hairs".) As you can see, he isn't just talking about combat systems in general, saying that some have similarities. He's claiming that the two are so similar it's almost the same experience. Have you played KOTOR? Was it like TB?

I asked you what would be more similar to turnbased, either a full realtime system, or a phasebased system with automated pauses.

RP, first of all, PB with autopause sounds as retarded as TB with autopause, so don't say that again. PB is certainly closer to TB then RT. So, what was the point of your question? Once again, Pete said that KOTOR RT with autopause was like TB or PB, which is wrong. If you are implying that KOTOR was phase-based, you are wrong too. Read that article by Gareth.

Well, he also implied right there that BG combat was also similar to TB. Is there anyone here who thinks that BG with all kinda crap enabled was exactly like/similar to/strongly reminded of TB? Can somebody say that ToEE combat was similar to BG or IWD? Just curious.

Those pauses don't follow the same guidelines as the pauses inherent to turnbased systems, but realtime phasebased with automated pauses - activated under certain conditions - does approximate it to turnbased.

How so?

However, the point is, what would you consider to be closer to turnbased, a purely realtime system, or a system that used pauses (even if they were different from the ones used in pure turnbased)?

What would you consider to be closer to drinking water, wall paint or gasoline? The answer is irrelevant, because no matter which one is technically closer, it can't be used as drinking water.

Did you notice by any chance that when I asked you "How so (how exactly does RT PB approximate to TB)?", you didn't answe but instead started talking about what the point was?

This is in context of what Hines said, and you were the one questioning his statement. Again you insisted on claiming it wasn't meant to be used as drinking water, when that was not the point.

Actually I insisted that similarities are so small, the two couldn't be compared. See Saint's cat and dog example.

Now, either you're being exceptionally obtuse, or you're just wasting my time - and everyone's time - by branching the conversation into points which stray away from the original point without giving definite answers on the main issues.

If I somehow forced you to read my stuff and reply, I apologize. If that was your own choice, don't blame me. If my arguments are too stupid or irrelevant for you, ignore them and talk to somebody smarter then me. I don't mind.

The answers are yep, and pretty much. If you are applying for a job, is there any practical difference between "no, we won't hire you" and "I don't think we will hire you"? Wouldn't you say that both answers are negative no matter what?

No, not really. I don't think anyone in their right mind would, either.

Fair enough, explain what makes the second reply positive in my example.

The only difference would be the statement itself, because the over-the-top reactions would still be the same.

I disagree, but it's not worth arguing about, believe what you want.

And that makes sense why?

He mentioned Baldur's Gate because KoTOR's system derives from it. Would it make more sense to you if he claimed KoTOR's system was built upon that of Temple of Elemental Evil? He mentioned a game, and mentioned another one with a similar combat model. How does this not make sense?

Let's try that again. He's asked what FO3 would be like, and he answers "we aint gonna make an isometric BG game that's for sure". So, once again, why BG reference? Hopefully you see now that your and Pete's explanation involving KOTOR didn't make any sense.

Since you apparently can't answer my queestion, i'll ask it again, slightly changed so it's more understandable: Are you suggesting they're unprofessional by being honest in saying that they are not certain of being able to work with something entirely different, because it's not what they do well?

I thought my answer was clear, my mistake. Yes, Pete (not Bethesda, we were talking about Pete and his statements, since it was his job to handle the masses) was unprofessional by being honest. Happy now?

Overalll, do you disagree that Pete's involvement made the matters much worse?

Come on, anyone's involvement would have made matters much worse.

Actually, there were 2 major negativity spikes, first, when Pete said that console is planned, second, when he said that infamous BG comment.

So basically, you're telling me it's more professional to lie than to tell the truth? Can i get this in paper, preferably signed?

Depends on what one's job is. If one's job is to lie (sales, marketing, pr, politics, etc), then it would be very unprofessional not to.

My mistake, because i thought the question made to him was not regarding that. Still, this doesn't change that he is using a successful game, and certain gameplay elements, as an example of what they believe to be important. I don't see how is mentioning KoTOR detrimental to the fanbase, or unprofessional.

It does change the context, because he's praising KOTOR for innovation that Fallout, the game that Beth got the license for, did years before. So, the only question here is whether Pete's ignorance is his own and does it represent larger ignorance, that of Bethesda producers and developers, about Fallout and its mechanics.

 

[StraitLacedDeviant]

Pete is the PR guy. I think the ignorance is his and his alone on that last point. Even Morrowind let you be "B@D" in a way, before KOTOR.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

His chosen interpretation is at least as valid as yours, and not really a point to attack his comprehension of the language.

When used in the context of splitting hairs, put forth by Mr. Hines, my interpretation is exact. He's saying phase based is almost exactly the same as turn based, which is what splitting hairs means. They're so close together that the difference between the two is negligible.

That difference is NOT negligible. In phase based, all actions are determined at the start of the round, rather than one after another. Phase based has a huge and fundamental difference from turn based because it's sequential. That means there are no simultaneous actions, like a grenade in the air at the same time as the target moving. It also means that situations like the Another War situation where a gun wielding enemy tries to move away from your stabby guy resulting in you chasing the gun guy around the room also can't happen, ever. It means that if you're shooting at a moving target and you've rolling a successful To-Hit, that projectile won't have to curve to hit that moving target.

There's nothing splitting hairs about this. Sure, there's similarities, but they aren't similar. A Volkswagon Beetle and a Dodge Viper have similarities, but if you can convince any car person that they're similar cars, you've accomplished quite a feat.

 

[POOPERSCOOPER]

you faggets, i worked hard on the picture. Cherrious it.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

His chosen interpretation is at least as valid as yours, and not really a point to attack his comprehension of the language.

When used in the context of splitting hairs, put forth by Mr. Hines, my interpretation is exact. He's saying phase based is almost exactly the same as turn based, which is what splitting hairs means. They're so close together that the difference between the two is negligible.

There's nothing splitting hairs about this. Sure, there's similarities, but they aren't similar. A Volkswagon Beetle and a Dodge Viper have similarities, but if you can convince any car person that they're similar cars, you've accomplished quite a feat.

Ok, i will take your word for it when taken under the context of splitting hairs.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Just 'cause you disagree with some points, doesn't mean they are irrational.

Didn't said the points were irrational. Simply said that there doesn't appear to be an interest in discussing some of them rationally.

Of course, I doubted that because they aren't similar. Whatever similarities do exist they are the same as similarities between water and gasoline, which, for the purpose of this discussion, are non-existent.

Reading your statement wherein you claim that turnbased and phasebased aren't similar, followed by saying that whatever similarities they have are unexistant for the purposes of this thread, leads me into thinking your skill in doublespeak might be a welcome addition to the Party.

Pete claimed that his gameplay experience was like that of a TB game. ("I played KOTOR with auto-pause turned on in the options, so that it pauses between each round of combat, thereby turning it into more of a turn-based (or round-based, let's not split hairs".) As you can see, he isn't just talking about combat systems in general, saying that some have similarities. He's claiming that the two are so similar it's almost the same experience. Have you played KOTOR? Was it like TB?

Did you played it with autopause settings? Automated pauses used in a RT environment don't magically and indisputably turn it into turn or phasebased, but it does approach PB considerably, while having similarities with TB.

RP, first of all, PB with autopause sounds as retarded as TB with autopause, so don't say that again.

Why? Do i risk a change in avatar, or rank (or both)? A one week ban from the forums? Scorn? Someone pissing on my grave? Having my nickname or real name associated with "willing asian midget cocksucker" on Google? God killing a handful of kittens? Lightning striking me down? Homosexual pornography on my PM box? Anything worth losing sleep over?

Anyway, i actually meant to say realtime with automated pauses.

PB is certainly closer to TB then RT. So, what was the point of your question?

Debunking the claim that it has no similarities (ie, isn't similar) to TB. By telling me it's closer, than you recognize there are definetely elements in it that warrant an approximation.

Once again, Pete said that KOTOR RT with autopause was like TB or PB, which is wrong. If you are implying that KOTOR was phase-based, you are wrong too.

Actually he implied KoTOR's system, with those automated pauses, was more akin to phasebased or turnbased. He didn't said it was like TB or PB, he said it became similar to it.

If I somehow forced you to read my stuff and reply, I apologize. If that was your own choice, don't blame me. If my arguments are too stupid or irrelevant for you, ignore them and talk to somebody smarter then me. I don't mind.

.... Ok. You might want to tone down the histrionics. I only pointed out you have a tendency of going off on divergent points which don't matter to the main issue at hand or are of minimal importance, and just drag these conversations on and on, which is pointless. Do you honestly think there's a point in addressing his statements more than once per reply?

Fair enough, explain what makes the second reply positive in my example.

It doesn't make it neither positive or negative. That's what uncertainty is. When i'm telling someone that i am not certain of what will happen, i'm not giving any confirmation that would allow people to infer a negative or positive result. When i'm telling someone i don't know the outcome of something, i'm not giving them a positive or negative answer. I'm merely implying there's an element of chance which can go either way.

And you wonder why i consider you exceptionally obtuse at times?

I disagree, but it's not worth arguing about, believe what you want.

I believe what i see. So far, wheter Bethesda's overall comments are damning or reassuring, the same reactions are there, so i have no reason to believe otherwise.

Let's try that again. He's asked what FO3 would be like, and he answers "we aint gonna make an isometric BG game that's for sure". So, once again, why BG reference? Hopefully you see now that your and Pete's explanation involving KOTOR didn't make any sense.

I had the idea you were talking of his mention of KoTOR and BG when he was discussing the combat model, not about his BG reference in the PoV interview.

As to why he mentioned BG, he mentioned a game that is known by many people. He's being asked in an interview what are Bethesda's plans regarding the PoV, and he uses the example of a famous game as something they are not going to do. Could he have said that they aren't planing on making an isometic Fallout game? Yes he could. But the end result - people complaining - would be the same, so why bother harping on this minute detail?

I thought my answer was clear, my mistake. Yes, Pete (not Bethesda, we were talking about Pete and his statements, since it was his job to handle the masses) was unprofessional by being honest. Happy now?

Quite.

Actually, there were 2 major negativity spikes, first, when Pete said that console is planned, second, when he said that infamous BG comment.

The first would be caused by whoever said it, wheter the company's PR, wheter a developer. The second didn't caused a "negativity spike" because he mentioned BG, but because he said they were usnure of using isometric, which is a holy cow to several people.

Depends on what one's job is. If one's job is to lie (sales, marketing, pr, politics, etc), then it would be very unprofessional not to.

None of those has 'lying' as a job requirement, last i heard. In fact there is a difference between lying and just being charismatic and influent.

It does change the context, because he's praising KOTOR for innovation that Fallout, the game that Beth got the license for, did years before. So, the only question here is whether Pete's ignorance is his own and does it represent larger ignorance, that of Bethesda producers and developers, about Fallout and its mechanics.

Granted, although that appears to be more his opinion than Bethesda's view on it.

 

[Briosafreak]

Just to let everyone know that tonight it will be Bad Boys II with six stout beers, cheetos and maybe some pasta.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Reading your statement wherein you claim that turnbased and phasebased aren't similar, followed by saying that whatever similarities they have are unexistant for the purposes of this thread, leads me into thinking your skill in doublespeak might be a welcome addition to the Party.

I used to work in marketing after all Anyway, many things have similarities , but not many things are similar. Take you and me, for example. We both are human, both like RPGs, both visit the Codex, yet we are far from being similar. Same with TB and PB.

Did you played it with autopause settings? Automated pauses used in a RT environment don't magically and indisputably turn it into turn or phasebased, but it does approach PB considerably, while having similarities with TB.

Yes, I did, but I disagree. It neither approaches PB nor displays similarities with TB, but that's my opinion and there is no need to force it on you. There is one thing that I hope you'd agree with, we don't want to see FO3 with KOTOR combat whetever it's similar to.

RP, first of all, PB with autopause sounds as retarded as TB with autopause, so don't say that again.

Why? Do i risk a change in avatar, or rank (or both)? A one week ban from the forums? Scorn? Someone pissing on my grave? Having my nickname or real name associated with "willing asian midget cocksucker" on Google? God killing a handful of kittens? Lightning striking me down? Homosexual pornography on my PM box? Anything worth losing sleep over?

Whoa, you've got very vivid imagination, RP. Did I imply any of that? I noticed that you mistakenly used an oxymoron in your speech, and informed you of that. That's all.

PB is certainly closer to TB then RT. So, what was the point of your question?

Debunking the claim that it has no similarities (ie, isn't similar) to TB. By telling me it's closer, than you recognize there are definetely elements in it that warrant an approximation.

ClosER, but not close enough to warrant an approximation.

Do you honestly think there's a point in addressing his statements more than once per reply?

Honestly I think that this whole discussion is pointless, but it entertains me.

It doesn't make it neither positive or negative. That's what uncertainty is. When i'm telling someone that i am not certain of what will happen, i'm not giving any confirmation that would allow people to infer a negative or positive result.

That would be the "I don't know" response - simple and straightforward. "I don't know if we're going to suddenly do a top-down isometric Baldur's Gate-style game, because that's not what we do well" is very, very different. "Suddenly" and "because" add a lotta flavour there, but maybe that just me being obtuse again.

And you wonder why i consider you exceptionally obtuse at times?

I must admit that I hardly care what people think of me, so if considering me obtuse entertains you, then be my guest.

None of those has 'lying' as a job requirement, last i heard. In fact there is a difference between lying and just being charismatic and influent.

Hah! Take our buddy Pete for example. Do you doubt that Bethesda decided what they will do with Fallout before they got the license? So, Pete is lying when he's saying everywhere it's too early to tell. See, part of the job. What about those tobacco companies that are still denying that smoking is bad for your health? Any salesman who's ever tried to convince you that you need whatever crap he's trying to sell you? Come on. Lying is a norm for these professions, as natural as breathing.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

The Bad Boys movies suck. Its only highlight is Téa Leoni in the first, and Gabrielle Union in the second.

 

[Briosafreak]

Yeah, but all the explosions will make my wife crazy, with the two 100mhz sound columns conected to an amplifier i set up, that way she might allow me to buy the new TV i want, instead of keeping the money.

The discussion has turned into a battle of wills by now, lost clarity and the entertainment value it once had.

 

[Shevek]

That would be the "I don't know" response - simple and straightforward. "I don't know if we're going to suddenly do a top-down isometric Baldur's Gate-style game, because that's not what we do well" is very, very different. "Suddenly" and "because" add a lotta flavour there, but maybe that just me being obtuse again.

I agree.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I used to work in marketing after all

True dat

Anyway, many things have similarities , but not many things are similar. Take you and me, for example. We both are human, both like RPGs, both visit the Codex, yet we are far from being similar. Same with TB and PB.

Correct. The thing is, like i had said when talking to Saint back there, similar is defined as having similarities, which is why i did not see a reason to fret over someone saying those things were similar. To me it's perfectly acceptable for someone to claim you and i are similar, or that TB and PB are similar - because they have similarities.

However, like Saint pointed out, there was also the context of splitting hairs that Hines mentioned, which indeed does make it different.

Yes, I did, but I disagree. It neither approaches PB nor displays similarities with TB, but that's my opinion and there is no need to force it on you. There is one thing that I hope you'd agree with, we don't want to see FO3 with KOTOR combat whetever it's similar to.

Well, the approximation i see is due to how rounds are handled. KoTOR's use of automated pauses can enable a pause at the beginning of every round, which is basically how PB operates, followed by executing all turns automatically, albeit one by one. KoTOR, OTOH executes them simultaneously, which is different, no doubt, but i believe its an approach to PB.

As to the other point, yes, I agree that we do not want to see Fallout 3 use KoTOR-styled combat.

Whoa, you've got very vivid imagination, RP. Did I imply any of that?

No, it's the underpant stealing gnomes, and the bloody heat.

I noticed that you mistakenly used an oxymoron in your speech, and informed you of that. That's all.

Wut? U cal mi ox moron?

ClosER, but not close enough to warrant an approximation.

Agree to disagree.

Honestly I think that this whole discussion is pointless, but it entertains me.

Bitch.

That would be the "I don't know" response - simple and straightforward. "I don't know if we're going to suddenly do a top-down isometric Baldur's Gate-style game, because that's not what we do well" is very, very different. "Suddenly" and "because" add a lotta flavour there, but maybe that just me being obtuse again.

I don't quite see it as negative. He does imply that it is something they don't do well, however, how that will actually come out is still up in the air in the statement. At best, it can go either way, although its understandable why some would take it negatively.

Hah! Take our buddy Pete for example. Do you doubt that Bethesda decided what they will do with Fallout before they got the license? So, Pete is lying when he's saying everywhere it's too early to tell. See, part of the job. What about those tobacco companies that are still denying that smoking is bad for your health? Any salesman who's ever tried to convince you that you need whatever crap he's trying to sell you? Come on. Lying is a norm for these professions, as natural as breathing.

I suppose you'd call honest salesmen, PRs, and politicians freaks of nature?

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Yeah, but all the explosions will make my wife crazy

And we all know what to do with crazy wifes, eh?

*wink wink*

*nudge nudge*

 

[Vault Dweller]

As to the other point, yes, I agree that we do not want to see Fallout 3 use KoTOR-styled combat.

And thus another battle of wills sponsored by too much free time has come to an end!

I suppose you'd call honest salesmen, PRs, and politicians freaks of nature?

Merely incompetent

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

We should get sponsors for these matches :D

 

[POOPERSCOOPER]

We should get sponsors for these matches :D

ya, like your moms vagina

 

[Briosafreak]

At least she has genitalia, otherwise she could turn out like you poop

 

[plin]

and I doubt she has six-hundred and three posts of shit on a message board.

 

[Briosafreak]

I still <3 poop, now go and kiss and make up with RP, he lives near my brother in law and might hurt him since he can`t get to you.