233 réponses à ce sujet

[MassEffect762]

McAdams wrote...

LOL
I think with so much fan feedback, Biware gets it, or has partly understood what they did right. Lets be positive here.

More importantly does EA "get" it.

[erynnar]

[quote]Ariella wrote...

[quote]erynnar wrote...

[quote]Ariella wrote...

[quote]erynnar wrote...

[quote]Ariella wrote...

[quote]Alistairlover94 wrote...

When they start development for DA3, Mark Darrah, Mike Laidlaw and David Gaider will probably bash DA2 and point out its flaws, and how they improved upon it in every way, and how they "weren't going to rest on their laurels" .

Just like they did in the developer diaries for DA2, where they also bashed Origins, if i'm not mistaken.[/quote]

They didn't bash Origins, they pointed out places where they got negative criticism on the game, and thus tried ti improve upon those things like the color palate or the art design (both of which were panned in Origins by many people).

As they've probably already started development on DA3, they'll do the same thing and see what were the biggest problems fans had, what worked, what didn't, what they can improve on, what to leave along. A lot of that will be based on fan feedback. But it doesn't mean it's bashing the game, it means they listen to the fanbase and try and improve their product.
[/quote]

I see DA2 as a bash against Origins in many ways. The stripping away of what made DAO so good and not fixing what wasn't. They completely rehauled DAO, then they make your choices in it not matter once stinkin' bit except for a few cameos. Two of those cameos, were characters who could have died (and no Anders didn't die in Andraste's cave filled with magic woo woo, or the ashes of Andraste's magical knickers which apparently puts heads back on bodies!  And if that is a good way to explain how Leli comes back, I'll start considering "The Enquirer" as fine literature, sorry Mark Twain).
[/quote]

No offense, erynnar, but a lot of what you say here is subjective. I don't see where they stripped away what was good about Origins and left what wasn't.

As for the two cameos, I think there are actually 3, and I'm pretty sure, checking that two of those cameos/quests don't happen unless the characters survive. I do remember someone saying one of the two quests triggered as a bug that was fixed in patch 1.02 even if the character in question was considered dead in the DAO play through.

As for Leli, I don't know, without saying anything too spoilery, I got the sense she change profoundly between when my Warden last saw her (I didn't kill her) and the cameo. I'm looking forward to findout what did happen to her in that mean time.

[quote]

That is shoddy story telling, and a complete ignoring of their own lore and storylines established in the first, and an insult to DAO, Mr. Knowles, those of us who knew DAO wasn't perfect but know it is far better than DA2 will ever hope to be, and the writers and devs who gave DAO such love and shared it with us.
[/quote]

I'd be careful about putting words in Brent Knowles mouth, since I've seen the blog where he said DA2 looked like a strong game, just not the type of game he was interested in.

And again, we're getting into subjective territory. You call the storytelling shoddy versus DAO. I say it's just different that DAO. And again with no offense intended it was the same group of writers and developers who brough DA2 to life, just like DAO.

[quote]
I get the distinct feeling as if DA2 was made to act as if DAO's story is the shoddy embarrassment that needed an overhaul, it didn't. Yes it may have been like High Fantasy stories told since mankind crawled out of the mud. Don't like it? Also fine and good, tastes range. But there is a reason why that kind of story appeals so broadly. Slave makes good from rags to riches isn't new and original either. I liked both stories, but DA2's was poorly executed imho.   It wasn't DAO that needed to be overhauled while pretending that it had some form of game herpes.

[/quote]

I doubt the changes in DA2 narrative was a a slap at DAO's narrative at all. The fact of the matter though is they'd told their save the world story and wanted to try something different in the next installment, which I think is fair. I can understand why they wanted to deviate, especially considering there really was no way to top the Blight until they can show us some more of the backstory of Thedas beyond the Grey Wardens/Fereldan etc, DA2 allowed them to do that. From every article and interview I've read about both games, they're proud papas about both of them, but they're perfectionists always wanting to try and do it better. And while that can be annoying when talking about a story that's become as beloved as Origins, I'd rather have perfectionsts working on the DA franchise than someone who's going to turn in work that's just "good enough".

[/quote]
[quote]
And of course it's subjective, I thought the I feel
part was clear, but maybe not. As to bringing back dead people without a
plausible explanaion (and ashes falling on her is shoddy, so is the
cave is magic and did it)  That is not subjective. That is just poor by
the accepted standards of writing or good story telling.
[/quote]

Having not seen the official word on the whole members who were killed then resurected stuff, I can't completely comment, but I'm willing to bet it'll play deeper into the story of Thedas a slightly later date.

As for Leli, Ogrhen does point out that Lyrium is laced through those caves, which may have been what granted the Guardian his rather long life.

There's a lot more to Lyrium than a power source for magic, I'm betting on it.

[quote]


Well I agree I would rather have perfectionists working on the game instead of something that was just "good enough."  So where were they on DA2?  Because if you kill Leli, or Anders in their stories before DA2 ( I didn't, I always liked Leli). They should stay dead and good story telling would be to create two other characters to fill their roles in DA2 depending on the players' save games.  Same with Justice mentioning he can't leave Christoph's body.

You didn't need a demon inhabited mage to make them a zealot.  Have the mage grow up in the Kirkwall circle under Meredith's ever tighting thumb and Orsino's visions of freedom.  That, would have been believeable to me, would have made sense, and would have made me more emotionally tied to the characters, the mages or the templars and still been that different story from an epic one we got in DAO. 
[/quote]

I don't know why they brought back Leli, except as I said eariler there's more to her than meets the eye. as for Anders, first the guys slippery enough to escape the templars seven times at least, faking his own death, not so surprising. And Justice needed to vacate Kristoff's body asap to keep the promise he made to Kristoff's wife. But the whole Anders/Justice idea was centered around having a cursed romance along the lines of Buffy and Angel, me being the Buffy fan I am recogized it before I read Jen Helpern's interview about writing in the SG. Anders especially  Angel before he was turned, a fop with possible talent but doesn't give a darn about anything except his own pleasure. Justice forces him to start caring more about the world and about redemption.

In fact a certain moment in act three reminded me of something Angel did in act two, threw a bunch of evil lawyers in a room at a new years party with the vampires they'd summoned, and locked the doors behind them. It was the nadir moment for him and was he was so full of self loath at that moment he didn't believe he could make a difference so to Hell (literally in that case) with it all.

[quote]
I don't have a problem with a lack of big baddie.  The ideas behind this story were very good, but the execution left a lot to be desired to my mind. Why bother with the cameos, we didnt' need them. DA2 could have been it's own tale in the DA univere...oh right, it would have been not a sequel which garned a boat load of pre-orders (and no they never retracted that it is a sequel).  Seriously BioWare, I would have preordered if you had told me it was a separate game in the DA universe (maybe that's just me) but I would have (writing, the game, the universe, the lore=love)

See, I am so confused. It basically has a passing thing to with DAO (Lothering, and darkspawn, and a few convos about the Warden). The cameos aren't shown at the end. It's a sequel, but not a sequel. It is a home grown tale of local girl (well by blood local,sorta) makes good, becomes champion...but we need two boss fights not one because we don't need an big baddie, so we'll give you two, and at the end the CHOOSE A SIDE! CHOOSE NOW! But...it doesn't matter.

I almost feel like I have bipolar disorder with DA2. I mean, what is it trying to do? So much is just fantastic, epic (with out an archdemon), balls to the wall greatness. I see it. I can feel  it in there...and .  It's so aggravating to me. I want to love it, but I can't, becaue I am more confused by it than anything. Seriously ****ing confused. 

As to Mr. Knowles, no I don't speak for him, just read his blog. Again subject to my whack a doodle interpretation which is subject to human error just like everyone here unless you are all aliens! And FYI if you read what I said more carefully, I was saying I felt it was an insult to the man, not that he did. I wouldn't presume to speak for him or anybody here ( I try very hard not to, feel free to read my other posts if you haven't. Or don't, that might be tedious..ick).

Please, tell me where you think so much of DAO is in DA2, I am interested (no sarcasm), because I am not seeing much. Graphics, characters retconned, your previous game saves don't matter one bit, the dead rising back to life (and not in a zombie or waves of enemies way). I could go on, but I already did that in the reviews and constructive crit form.  And before I get labled a hater, I liked some of the changes. Playing a mage and having a blast, but that doesn't change my position on the story, or anything else I have spoken of on other threads.

edited because I tried to fix the stupid formatting issues and couldn't (bleh) and spelling..DOH!

[/quote]

I apologize for misreading the Knowles comment, it just seems to be the mention of him has become the cricket bat with ward vvs the DA developement team. I should have known better coming from you. I'm sorry.

As for my personal take on both game, I have to go back a little. I was never originally going to get myself invovled in DA back when it was announce. I saw some of the very early graphics and such and wasn't impressed. Came back in 2008 little more than a year after giving birth to my final daughter and saw what they were doing and said this I like! I've done a bit of writing myself and I fell in love with the story of Thedas, then I fell in love with the NPCs and the hard choices. I never finished a play through as anything other than a female Couslin because I was just that enamoured with Alistair. I loved Morrigan, I love Sten and Wynne and pretty much everybody. I admired the character work on Logain even though I hated his actions with a passion. I kept collecting bits and pieces of lore wondering when the mask was going to fall off and all the world's preconceptions would be shaken,

That's what DA2 did for me in some ways.I saw new parts of the universe, revisited some old friends but got to see them though new eyes. There's an abandoned city in the first Wheel of Time book called Shadar Logoth that has evil practically seeped into the stones of the place, where corruption is almost alive. Kirkwall strikes me as something like that but inhabited. A Hellmouth for want of a better term, and it's Hawke who ends up trying keep the mouth from opening and swollowing them all.

Are there thing I would have done differently? Yes, for example I would have had the Viscount make Hawke a confidential agent of his, period, during act two, even without Hawke's connections to the Qunari to give the count someone besides Meredith and Orsino to talk to and help balance the situation, I think that would have made act 3 more interesting. If that had been the case I would have had certain parties make bids for Hawke's favor earlier in act two rather than stuffing it all into act 3.  I'd give more detail but that would violate the spoilers.

But I do feel that DA2 is a branch off of DAO. In many ways it's the commoner origin lots of people wanted, and I get the feeling that much is going to stem from Fereldan in the future, the champion being just the first wave, as those of Fereldan seem to take a greater value in individual freedom than say Orlais or the Marches, and the class system seems less rigid. That's just me though.

[/quote]

Ah, you are always such a pleasure to read, sweetie. And no apologies needed to me. I actually went back because I thought I had made a boo boo! I mean hell, I am only human. I was about to smack myself for it! I am more apt to think I did do it.

[Maria13]

To quote Hawke: "When are you guys going to start kissing?"

Great, constructive discussion.

For me DA2 was somewhat of a comedown from DA:O but then like few others, I put that game on an altar, I had never experienced anything quite like it before. But both are unfinished and imperfect, in DA:O everything following the Landsmeet was rushed, tragically rushed. The DLC apart from the earlier ones were rubbish...

In DA2 I found the same in Act III, I would dearly like BW to learn to give its games those all important finishing touches... The mean the difference between mediocrity and greatness...

[Realmzmaster]

Apologize for what? You mean Bioware should apologize for making a game some gamers did not like? Bioware should apologize for making the game the company wanted to make? I suggest that they also send a big thank you to all the gamers who like the game.
Everyone has a right to like or dislike the game. Everyone has a right to criticize or praise DA2.

I think a lot of the bashing for either liking or disliking DA2 stems from gamer's perspective. Many of the gamers who like DA:O and not DA2 are afraid that this signals the future path of the franchise. On the other side are the gamers who liked the new direction and do not want to step backwards.
I happen to like both DA:O and DA:2. As far as the some of the complaints of reused maps that occurred in both games. The difference was the vastness and scope of DA:O when compared to DA:2. DA:O covered a larger geographical area. Therefore the reused maps were not as noticeable. You could forgive it more with DA:O than DA:2.
The faster combat did not bother me. The camp system made sense in DA:O since you were traveling from place to place. The same system would make no sense in a city where everyone lived. In a city you drop in to visit each other. When you go out on a quest or mission it is usually a short trip like the quests in DA:2 as compared to DA:O.
DA:O over all quest was to get help from those bound by the treaties. The focus of DA:2 is a more personal story about the rise of the character to the pinnacle of achievement and the pitfalls incurred.
One can agree or disagree about the focus. I personally liked the change from epic to a more personal story. It was different. There are aspects I did not like. I would have forgone the use of the idol to explain Meredith's decline.
I like the different themes of each act. Act 1: Survival and the drive for personal achievement through the Deep Roads expedition . Act 2 The Qunari problem and finally Act 3 Mage versus Templar which was the undercurrent through the first two acts.
Other people state that it was three disjointed stories rather than a continuous story like DA:O which I understand. DA:O was a story told over roughly a year. DA:2 is a story told over roughly seven years. DA:2 is told in different snapshots over that period which causes disjointness.
For example we do not know what happen during Hawke's first year.
Some like this approach other do not. I have no problem with either way, but that is my personal opinion.
Bioware does not owe anyone an apology (unless it is for the bugs that appear in all their games.). Bioware made a game. Some like it others do not. You voice your opinion with your critique and your wallet (on future games).
Constructive criticism will hopefully be appreciated. Venting (while making you feel better) probably will not get their attention or is simply ignored.

[erynnar]

Maria13 wrote...

To quote Hawke: "When are you guys going to start kissing?"

Great, constructive discussion.

For me DA2 was somewhat of a comedown from DA:O but then like few others, I put that game on an altar, I had never experienced anything quite like it before. But both are unfinished and imperfect, in DA:O everything following the Landsmeet was rushed, tragically rushed. The DLC apart from the earlier ones were rubbish...

In DA2 I found the same in Act III, I would dearly like BW to learn to give its games those all important finishing touches... The mean the difference between mediocrity and greatness...

*tickles Maria*  You just be careful missy! I might snog you!

[erynnar]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Apologize for what? You mean Bioware should apologize for making a game some gamers did not like? Bioware should apologize for making the game the company wanted to make? I suggest that they also send a big thank you to all the gamers who like the game.
Everyone has a right to like or dislike the game. Everyone has a right to criticize or praise DA2.

I think a lot of the bashing for either liking or disliking DA2 stems from gamer's perspective. Many of the gamers who like DA:O and not DA2 are afraid that this signals the future path of the franchise. On the other side are the gamers who liked the new direction and do not want to step backwards.
I happen to like both DA:O and DA:2. As far as the some of the complaints of reused maps that occurred in both games. The difference was the vastness and scope of DA:O when compared to DA:2. DA:O covered a larger geographical area. Therefore the reused maps were not as noticeable. You could forgive it more with DA:O than DA:2.
The faster combat did not bother me. The camp system made sense in DA:O since you were traveling from place to place. The same system would make no sense in a city where everyone lived. In a city you drop in to visit each other. When you go out on a quest or mission it is usually a short trip like the quests in DA:2 as compared to DA:O.
DA:O over all quest was to get help from those bound by the treaties. The focus of DA:2 is a more personal story about the rise of the character to the pinnacle of achievement and the pitfalls incurred.
One can agree or disagree about the focus. I personally liked the change from epic to a more personal story. It was different. There are aspects I did not like. I would have forgone the use of the idol to explain Meredith's decline.
I like the different themes of each act. Act 1: Survival and the drive for personal achievement through the Deep Roads expedition . Act 2 The Qunari problem and finally Act 3 Mage versus Templar which was the undercurrent through the first two acts.
Other people state that it was three disjointed stories rather than a continuous story like DA:O which I understand. DA:O was a story told over roughly a year. DA:2 is a story told over roughly seven years. DA:2 is told in different snapshots over that period which causes disjointness.
For example we do not know what happen during Hawke's first year.
Some like this approach other do not. I have no problem with either way, but that is my personal opinion.
Bioware does not owe anyone an apology (unless it is for the bugs that appear in all their games.). Bioware made a game. Some like it others do not. You voice your opinion with your critique and your wallet (on future games).
Constructive criticism will hopefully be appreciated. Venting (while making you feel better) probably will not get their attention or is simply ignored.

Yeah I don't need an apology. 

I do disagree that DAO and it's design, its gameplay, and what made it great is a backwards step.  You don't win GotY or get to put AAA in the title if you made something that was backwards.  Were there things wrong with DAO? Yes. Were there things that worked but could work better? Sure.  But DA2 tried to serve too many masters and  fell flat from its true shining epic potential. Or as my grandfather used to say, "Jack of all trades and master of none."

BioWare should decide if it is going to be RPG with action, or a hack and slash button masher with anime elements and art design.  Trying to make DA into ME/Call of Duty with swords to grab a different audience probably wasn't the way to go. Not to mention rushing it out the door. Just my two cents, which really are more like a button and some pocket lint for what they're worth.

[Ariella]

erynnar wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Apologize for what? You mean Bioware should apologize for making a game some gamers did not like? Bioware should apologize for making the game the company wanted to make? I suggest that they also send a big thank you to all the gamers who like the game.
Everyone has a right to like or dislike the game. Everyone has a right to criticize or praise DA2.

I think a lot of the bashing for either liking or disliking DA2 stems from gamer's perspective. Many of the gamers who like DA:O and not DA2 are afraid that this signals the future path of the franchise. On the other side are the gamers who liked the new direction and do not want to step backwards.
I happen to like both DA:O and DA:2. As far as the some of the complaints of reused maps that occurred in both games. The difference was the vastness and scope of DA:O when compared to DA:2. DA:O covered a larger geographical area. Therefore the reused maps were not as noticeable. You could forgive it more with DA:O than DA:2.
The faster combat did not bother me. The camp system made sense in DA:O since you were traveling from place to place. The same system would make no sense in a city where everyone lived. In a city you drop in to visit each other. When you go out on a quest or mission it is usually a short trip like the quests in DA:2 as compared to DA:O.
DA:O over all quest was to get help from those bound by the treaties. The focus of DA:2 is a more personal story about the rise of the character to the pinnacle of achievement and the pitfalls incurred.
One can agree or disagree about the focus. I personally liked the change from epic to a more personal story. It was different. There are aspects I did not like. I would have forgone the use of the idol to explain Meredith's decline.
I like the different themes of each act. Act 1: Survival and the drive for personal achievement through the Deep Roads expedition . Act 2 The Qunari problem and finally Act 3 Mage versus Templar which was the undercurrent through the first two acts.
Other people state that it was three disjointed stories rather than a continuous story like DA:O which I understand. DA:O was a story told over roughly a year. DA:2 is a story told over roughly seven years. DA:2 is told in different snapshots over that period which causes disjointness.
For example we do not know what happen during Hawke's first year.
Some like this approach other do not. I have no problem with either way, but that is my personal opinion.
Bioware does not owe anyone an apology (unless it is for the bugs that appear in all their games.). Bioware made a game. Some like it others do not. You voice your opinion with your critique and your wallet (on future games).
Constructive criticism will hopefully be appreciated. Venting (while making you feel better) probably will not get their attention or is simply ignored.

Yeah I don't need an apology. 

I do disagree that DAO and it's design, its gameplay, and what made it great is a backwards step.  You don't win GotY or get to put AAA in the title if you made something that was backwards.  Were there things wrong with DAO? Yes. Were there things that worked but could work better? Sure.  But DA2 tried to serve too many masters and  fell flat from its true shining epic potential. Or as my grandfather used to say, "Jack of all trades and master of none."

BioWare should decide if it is going to be RPG with action, or a hack and slash button masher with anime elements and art design.  Trying to make DA into ME/Call of Duty with swords to grab a different audience probably wasn't the way to go. Not to mention rushing it out the door. Just my two cents, which really are more like a button and some pocket lint for what they're worth.

I'm going to jump on this last bit, Erynnar, because it's something I've been thinking about for awhile in the DA series. I honestly believed that the Bioware dev team pour themselves into creating the world of Thedas, but had problems from the beginning coming up with a unified mechanics system to run it. And with part of the reason of DA wanting to be a break away from the D&D franchise and all its crazy rules, the mechanics have become a real thorn for them. They seem (operative word being seem) to be stuck between wanting a sharp responsive system that's unobtrusive, but at the same time will satisfy those people who love character builds and stats and how they interrelate. I think they swung too far one way with DAO (not that I minded, God no <g>) and tried to compensate in DA2 but went to far the other direction. If there is anything I truly thing Mike. Mark and company should do is sit down and come up with a unified system that will see them through the entire series before they write another story, They need to sit down and figure out that balance, because from everything I've read positive and negative, it's what the series needs.

[Mecher3k]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Apologize for what? You mean Bioware should apologize for making a game some gamers did not like? 

Given how the game's sales are dropping fast, and how more Bioware employees that worked on DA2 are saying DA2 was rushed, I saw it's actually most gamers did not like DA2.

[erynnar]

Ariella wrote...

erynnar wrote...

Realmzmaster wrote...

Apologize for what? You mean Bioware should apologize for making a game some gamers did not like? Bioware should apologize for making the game the company wanted to make? I suggest that they also send a big thank you to all the gamers who like the game.
Everyone has a right to like or dislike the game. Everyone has a right to criticize or praise DA2.

I think a lot of the bashing for either liking or disliking DA2 stems from gamer's perspective. Many of the gamers who like DA:O and not DA2 are afraid that this signals the future path of the franchise. On the other side are the gamers who liked the new direction and do not want to step backwards.
I happen to like both DA:O and DA:2. As far as the some of the complaints of reused maps that occurred in both games. The difference was the vastness and scope of DA:O when compared to DA:2. DA:O covered a larger geographical area. Therefore the reused maps were not as noticeable. You could forgive it more with DA:O than DA:2.
The faster combat did not bother me. The camp system made sense in DA:O since you were traveling from place to place. The same system would make no sense in a city where everyone lived. In a city you drop in to visit each other. When you go out on a quest or mission it is usually a short trip like the quests in DA:2 as compared to DA:O.
DA:O over all quest was to get help from those bound by the treaties. The focus of DA:2 is a more personal story about the rise of the character to the pinnacle of achievement and the pitfalls incurred.
One can agree or disagree about the focus. I personally liked the change from epic to a more personal story. It was different. There are aspects I did not like. I would have forgone the use of the idol to explain Meredith's decline.
I like the different themes of each act. Act 1: Survival and the drive for personal achievement through the Deep Roads expedition . Act 2 The Qunari problem and finally Act 3 Mage versus Templar which was the undercurrent through the first two acts.
Other people state that it was three disjointed stories rather than a continuous story like DA:O which I understand. DA:O was a story told over roughly a year. DA:2 is a story told over roughly seven years. DA:2 is told in different snapshots over that period which causes disjointness.
For example we do not know what happen during Hawke's first year.
Some like this approach other do not. I have no problem with either way, but that is my personal opinion.
Bioware does not owe anyone an apology (unless it is for the bugs that appear in all their games.). Bioware made a game. Some like it others do not. You voice your opinion with your critique and your wallet (on future games).
Constructive criticism will hopefully be appreciated. Venting (while making you feel better) probably will not get their attention or is simply ignored.

Yeah I don't need an apology. 

I do disagree that DAO and it's design, its gameplay, and what made it great is a backwards step.  You don't win GotY or get to put AAA in the title if you made something that was backwards.  Were there things wrong with DAO? Yes. Were there things that worked but could work better? Sure.  But DA2 tried to serve too many masters and  fell flat from its true shining epic potential. Or as my grandfather used to say, "Jack of all trades and master of none."

BioWare should decide if it is going to be RPG with action, or a hack and slash button masher with anime elements and art design.  Trying to make DA into ME/Call of Duty with swords to grab a different audience probably wasn't the way to go. Not to mention rushing it out the door. Just my two cents, which really are more like a button and some pocket lint for what they're worth.

I'm going to jump on this last bit, Erynnar, because it's something I've been thinking about for awhile in the DA series. I honestly believed that the Bioware dev team pour themselves into creating the world of Thedas, but had problems from the beginning coming up with a unified mechanics system to run it. And with part of the reason of DA wanting to be a break away from the D&D franchise and all its crazy rules, the mechanics have become a real thorn for them. They seem (operative word being seem) to be stuck between wanting a sharp responsive system that's unobtrusive, but at the same time will satisfy those people who love character builds and stats and how they interrelate. I think they swung too far one way with DAO (not that I minded, God no <g>) and tried to compensate in DA2 but went to far the other direction. If there is anything I truly thing Mike. Mark and company should do is sit down and come up with a unified system that will see them through the entire series before they write another story, They need to sit down and figure out that balance, because from everything I've read positive and negative, it's what the series needs.

Okay, I can totally see that. And I second it.  I said it makes me feel bipolar...and it the swinging from one to the other is adding to that and my seasickness:sick:, I kid! Nicely done!  That does make sense.  And I am hoping they do sit down and take what we all point out.  I mean, I never posted about DAO (other than fanfiction) because what little bothered me was so inconsequential to my enjoyment and immersion I was not thinking. I was being selfish (too busy playing) and not giving constructive feedback. So I hope to be of help this time around.  :happy: