130 réponses à ce sujet

[Redneck Sith]

I agree with the OP so far as combat goes. The ineffectiveness of AI tactics, along with the imbalance which exists with enemy archers/mages, as well as overuse of artificial 'gimmicks' to make fights tougher (ridiculous stunlocks, battlefields littered with traps, etc.) and poorly implemented scaling makes many fights a tedious and frustrating potion-chugging contest. I find myself turning the difficulty down to easy more often than I'd like, which is a shame. I like a challenge, but not when it's due to poorly done game mechanics.



Don't get me wrong, I love the game, but combat needs work. I shouldn't groan in frustration every time I see a fight coming, or get a random encounter on the map.



Oh, and... why the bloody blue blazes do I need to allocate SKILL POINTS in order to have an AI that isn't pants-on-head retarded? That is one of the worst design decisions I've ever encountered, period.

[I saved Star Wars :D]

"I'm writing a review!"

- "You're review is rubbish"

"It's not a review!"

- "You said it was"

"You are over analysing it!"





"x + y = z!"

- "No it doesn't"

"You are over analysing it!"

[Sam -stone- serious]

Elanareon wrote...

People want a non-linear game with no level scaling.... HUWOW! If it didn't have level scaling wouldn't you be forces to go down a path according to your level? So at that point it would be linear. Then people would start ranting about "ITS TOO LINEAR!!!". hehehe =D

Not when you create several places designed arround your level for you to wander about. Baldurs Gate style.

[SheffSteel]

Haha yes, D100 based systems are crap compared to D20 based systems because that +5 is barely noticeable.



We should have stuck with D6 based systems. Then you'd notice that +5 bonus. O yes.

[SheffSteel]

How level scaling works in Oblivion
1. Monster_level = Player_level

How level scaling works in Dragon Age
1. Monster_level = Player_level
2. if ( Monster_level < Designers_minimum_level ) then Monster_level = Designers_minimum_level

How level scaling ought to work
1. Monster_level = ( Player_level + Monsters_normal_level ) / 2

• if you fight a rat (level 1) at level 1 or 2, it's just a level 1 rat. This probably isn't very hard, and nor should it be.
• if you fight a rat (level 1) at level 9, it scales up to level 5. Negligible challenge - you could probably fight a dozen of them - and quite right too.
• if you fight a Revenant (level 15) at level 11, it scales down to level 13. You have a tough fight ahead of you. Maybe come back later?
• if you fight a Revenant (level 15) at level 19, it scales up to level 17. Who's laughing now?
• if you meet a dragon (level 20) at level 10, the dragon scales down to level 15. You're still screwed.

...not rocket science...

Modifié par SheffSteel, 17 décembre 2009 - 04:34 .

[Paromlin]

Survalli wrote...

best review i've seen on these boards in a long time. 

Thanks Survalli.
I'm glad I was able to voice the opinion of many people.

***

Lets not forget that some of the great non-linear games of the past had no scaling at all while having very good and challenging combat.

BG 1 and BG 2 I already mentioned. I naturally include BG2 in this category because the enormous majority of enemies in that game does not level scale. Also, I wouldn't call these games not immersive because you someties had to come back later.

From more recent games; there's the example of Storm of Zehir (NWN2 expansion). Totally non-linear exploration and no level scaling with good and challenging combat.

***

Soretooth, a toady is "one who flatters in the hope of gaining favors".  First, what's the "DAO community"? I don't see this as a "community", I see this forum as a conglomerate of people that come here for various reasons. So I couldn't disrespect the "community", because I don't perceive one. That said, I do not think all people in this conglomerate are toadies, although some are and the disclaimer was meant for them. Most likely, those who didn't find themselves in the said word didn't feel the need to comment it either (only you commented it, I believe).
I do disrespect the kind of person who, without questioning, always zealously and aggressively defends everything that comes out of Bioware's bakery. Besides, I don't need/want respect from this kind of person, because I understand it's a mutual feeling.


As an example I'll show you this. I'm replying to a person, who posted here as well, that is consistently and arrogantly dismissing any and every criticism about Bioware and their games. In this case he doesn't even understand the subject and is spreading misinformation and nonsense, but his call of duty is just too strong to resist.
http://social.biowar...9/index/44339/3 (Last post)

On the other hand, I wouldn't call a toady a person who comes here, is happy about this game and voices his opinion; nothing wrong with it. Now that we cleared the confusion you had about this, hopefully, we can get back on the topic subject: the game.

[Sethronu]

This one thing really jumped at me from your review:

"Disables/stuns. Here, Bioware would need ample tutoring from a company like Blizzard who understand the power of disables. What we got in DA are ridiculously long stunning spells which utterly imbalance an already imbalanced combat system to the point of making most fights trivial."

Serious? In case you haven't tried WoW, they STILL can't get PvP right and STILL fight a losing battle of 'Instances impossible without CC classes!' vs 'Nobody cares about CC!' - in a game that yielded gods know how many billions by now and had been in development soon what, 10 years. Yeah, good example right there.

Now, this doesn't change the fact that stuns in DA were ridiculous at some points, I'm not arguing that. (lol dog pounces), but it's not something solved easily, either. It's very tough finding the perfect line between 'useless' and 'overpowered' in this field. Take Mass Effect for example, certain disables were ridiculous there as well - but the game was still enjoyable and fun to play. I'm pretty sure same goes for many DA players - while an annoying mechanic in some scenarios, it's far from being the game-shattering menace you seem to draw. 



"- Combat is too chaotic and fast for my taste.

I dislike the regeneration of stamina and health in and after combat, but I understand this is the concept they built the game upon. I prefer to decide myself if and when I want to regenerate my resoursces; with a resting system.
Combat encounters are repetitive and I especially disliked Denerim's random encounters against 100 archers all scaled to about my level. Deep roads and the darkspawn were also a gigantic repetitive bore."

At least you're honest enough to say,  "for my taste" in this. Just because YOU dislike it, doesn't make it a bad game. Sure, regeneration mechanic could've been done differently (personally, I don't mind it) but it sure is tenfold better than the resting system of Ye Olde RPGs such as BG series or Fallout (whoopie-doo let's just make camp for a couple weeks in the middle of this evil dungeon, and let the world wait while we fix up our spells and injuries).


All in all, I can certainly agree with you that DA has plenty of flaws, especially combat-related mechanic stuff - but it's not what the game is about. For me and thousands of other players - as this forum proves - this game had been a truly exciting, immersive experience. While there was plenty of stuff that detracted from the game, it wasn't remotely enough to overshadow the brilliant characters and a story you can really 'live in'. It's just not much of a fighting game, but I doubt it was ever meant to be one, either. /my 2c



---
edit: as far as the level-scaling stuff and a lot of AI/whatever issues go, I think you're just looking into it too hard. Personally, I didn't really feel the horrendous horrors of horrible level-scaling on my two playthroughs at all; if you don't think about it, you don't even see it - and it's not like it actually makes the game worse in any way? Compared to fx Baldur's Gate, quite frankly I rather like my level scaling (and yes, I played BG a LOT, feel free to call me a BW fanboy now and discard any of my comments based on that). The pulling stuff... First time I heard about that was on these forums. In my eyes, it's pretty close to using a bug or a cheat code to get free levels / items / gold / whatever, then complain about the game being too easy. Obviously you're not supposed to pull monsters one by one from whatever groups - code oversight? Most likely. Don't use it if you hate it so much, voila, problem gone.


edit2: on topic of overpowered abilities / class combinations, you also have to remember that single-player RPGs aren't exactly built to be 'powerplayed' the way MMOs or RTS games are. For every person who tries to get the highest DPS out of their Rogue and uses a calculator to figure out whether this or that armor provides higher overall damage reduction, there are hundreds who simply don't care and go with what looks nicer or fits their theme better. For some players, these overpowered abilities may be the only way to actually complete the game without deviating from their RP theme and whatnot. It's very much a double-edged sword, of course - but a very important thing to consider.

Modifié par Sethronu, 17 décembre 2009 - 05:06 .

[Sethronu]

Oh and please, don't use BG2 as a good example of an RPG that works well without level scaling. If you plowed through all the sidequests there were with at least a little consideration towards your party composition, by the time you reached the Asylum you were absolutely unstoppable, and every fight was a joke no matter what difficulty setting you played on.



Or you could just roll a kensai/mage dual-class and solo the whole game, lol. Talk about overpowered.

[NativityInBlack]

 He used a pirated / hacked version of the game to say why he won't pay for it.

Just check his profile it's not bound to the game.

[aries1001]

Just some quick comments here:



1) re: Level Scaling



Level Scaling is in the game - not the level scaling used in Oblivio, more like the level scaling used in Fallout 3, I find. You will have zones where you cannot go, before you'rr strong enough. In Oblivion everything, yes even the bandits scaled with you. I had no problem with monsters and such level scaling with me (the player) in Oblivion. Seeing bandits in the best armour in the game at level 20 or 30, made me go like :what:? Even in Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, you had level scaling to an extent. The higher, the level you were, the better enemies you got, or there were more of them.

In Baldur's Gate 1, the higher level you were, you met more of the blue pixies (xivi?), and the higher level you were, the stronger the boss and other monsters would be. Level scaling done correctly can be a lot of fun and presents a challenge to the player(s). Level scaling done badly is something to avoid.



2) re: Combat mechanics



Armour and attack bonuses work differently than in D&D games, Georg Zoeller have made several posts (on the old DA forums) explaining how the combat, the attack, and the armour piercing system works. I didn't understand much of it; then again, I don't play games for the gameplay or to understand how the combat systems work. I play games for the story, the dialogue and the character presentation. And Georg is an employee at Bioware, he just does what his bosses tell him to do - e.g. Bioware have a meeting with their DA staff, then work gets delegated to people, then they do this, the bosses supervises, makes suggestions and Georg works on the suggestions.



re: forest designs



I'll admit that the game probably don't have the greatest visuals or the greatest graphics in the world.

I, too, find it very funny to see grass etc. flowing in the air somewhat. However, as this is not a gamebreaking bug, I don't mind it too much.



re: dialogue



To me, the choices you took that eventually made you break up with Zevran, are logical, consistent, as well as coherent. And yes, dialogues in computer games are difficult to make. As such, yes it is difficult to make a dialogue choice that'll benefit everyone's playstylee.



re: real life world counterparts



If you've read the devs. (i.e. Gaider's response) to this, this is how it was planned from the start. They took the idea of 'hey, what if Europe had magic - in the middle ages' and ran with it.



I agree that people should be able to post critizism about the game as long as it is done in a good way. And to that end I think the OP has succeeded; I would have liked to some solutions, though, as to what he would have done differently or what he (or she) would have changed and in what way.

[micheal001]

I have mixed feeling about DAO but I'm sure EA/Bioware wouldn't care if I liked the game or not or if I had a problem with it or not. I consider NWN too be a much more better rpg game with a sense of completeness to it then DAO.

[Skellimancer]

He does have some valid points. Not sure what he was on about with the Dialog though, the choices are obvious. Sure more options are nice but you can't expect the writers to add a 100 responses to cater for everyone.

The floating placables are funny but not game breaking.

The scaling is something i hate also, OP.

Modifié par Skellimancer, 17 décembre 2009 - 09:57 .

[AiTenshi1]

Just to throw in a couple of my own points for input, I guess. I don't agree with some of the original points in the OP, by the way, and can't even understand where a couple of the points come from, but I think it must be due to differences in play styles and party mechanics (for chosen party members, as you'll see in my post with my personal play style preferences).



In general, the #1 problem I have with this title and other Western games is very poor art aesthetics for character designs. This is especially true for games requiring tens or hundreds of hours of play time, or if the intent is to encourage replays. It happens in games from other countries, too, but I find a better range of styles in non-Western works, that's all. Obviously, this is subjective to each person, but my point is the entire lack of variety of types of aesthetic preventing players from making a character/avatar they can identify and empathize with based on their personal preference. Western artists need to get away from the sole focus on "realism," especially since such games feature plenty of unrealistic aesthetics and other unrealistic elements in other areas. The environment art is generally excellent as far as design goes, and that is typically true for Western 3D games, but the character art is simply unappealing as far as I am concerned.



That being said, the two biggest TECHNICAL problems for me in DA: O are the broken Tactics coding/system and the broken economics (common problem today for RPGs, for some odd reason). I would perhaps add two other concerns of fair importance: somewhat broken design of following quests (due to the large attribute boosts in one specific quest which really encourages doing that one first) and certain bugs that really should not make it into a shipped game (such as the broken radial wheel for poisons/traps or lack of scrolling on Tactics for console even though it's on PC version).



Tactics problems have been well documented in many posts. The intention was ok, but the actual implementation is very broken. To see a well done, detailed, flexible and fun Tactics system, Bioware should review Tales of Vesperia. I'd also suggest reviewing Star Ocean: The Last Hope, which has a very simple yet enjoyable Tactics system. In fact, unlike one poster here, I feel the opposite about Star Ocean - I enjoy it far more than DA: O as far as playing a game (although it does have it's own problems such as not being able to change your onscreen avatar to be who you choose for your lead character). Anyway... I have been testing various aspects of Tactics on Hard and Nightmare mode in an attempt to get my party to do logical actions, and it simply is not possible in many instances due to the very poor coding (not to mention issues such as status effects not having specific spell/talent lists associated with them). Of course, I play ranged characters (all female party, or mostly females when all female is not possible). The way Tactics is coded in this game may work for melee players, but ranged parties will not behave logically no matter what you attempt to set in the system. I have carefully watched the actions of my party with many different setups, and the problem is definitely in the logic of the coding. As a former programmer, I can see the decisions that were made and the play style bias they exhibit. There are other huge problems, too, such as being unable to create separate saved Tactics (builds, in other games), particularly for certain strategies such as Shapeshifter (where you need to be able to state the tactics while a party member is in animal form based on the form's abilities). The inability to issue movement commands (ala Mass Effect) only adds insult to injury of an already broken system, making the combat almost unplayable for certain play styles (i.e. parties who use ranged combat focus).



The economics in this and many other games in recent years is ludicrous and totally unworkable (which leads to breakdown of immersion and roleplaying, of course). I'd add the broken inventory system but I consider that to be part and parcel of the economics. I doubt that I have to offer specifics because a cursory overview of resources and pricing compared to the state of almost any character you meet in the game world demonstrates the unworkability of the system as it is presented to the player.



On the positive side, generally speaking, I found the character and lore writing to be very good. I wish that we could combine Bioware's lore writing with Japanese art aesthetics. I also found the acting to be very good, thankfully. I completely disagree with the poster who complained about certain dialogue such as Morrigan's stance on intelligent design. Such dialogues are perfectly fine when they are in character and develop the personality of the character, and this is exactly what Bioware does with such elements in this game. It would only be undesirable if it did not fit the character, but that is not the case in this title, at least for the many instances I have observed during game play.



There is some potential here for a new IP, but Bioware needs to correct certain blatant issues and fix broken logic/coding in order to progress and maintain their property, at least as far as I am concerned.

[Paromlin]

One thing that comes to my mind now is that some enemies should have passive on hit abilities that make them unique. I miss that. Sure, they have some active abilities but I'd want a spider to have a chance to poison you with each hit (physical check), a wraith/shade with lifesteal (not just the slam attack that procs 1 in 10 hits) and/or chance to scare you if you don't pass a mental resistance check, zombies that transfer disease if you don't pass a physical check etc. To make various enemy attacks truly diverse; not just in attack rating and damage.

Also, guys, you don't need to repeat it has "limited" scaling. It's been repeated by bioware 1000 times. The thing that people don't consider is that most of the time you'll be within the level range THUS the enemy will be scaled to your level - making it exactly like Oblivion. Limited or not limited; there's no need for handholding the player with level scaling. Bioware, you can do better!

It would be nice if Bioware released an official mod that eliminates enemy and item scaling... I'd certainly consider giving the game another chance since I am optimistic that combat mechanics will be improved with patches.

[quote]Sethronu wrote...

This one thing really jumped at me from your review:

"Disables/stuns. Here, Bioware would need ample tutoring from a company like Blizzard who understand the power of disables. What we got in DA are ridiculously long stunning spells which utterly imbalance an already imbalanced combat system to the point of making most fights trivial."

Serious? In case you haven't tried WoW, they STILL can't get PvP right and STILL fight a losing battle of 'Instances impossible without CC classes!' vs 'Nobody cares about CC!' - in a game that yielded gods know how many billions by now and had been in development soon what, 10 years. Yeah, good example right there. [/quote]

Did it jump and crit you?  I'm sorry.

I'm serious. I haven't played WoW. I was referring to disables in other Blizzard games, they seem reasonable. I certainly haven't seen anything that is aoe, has a low cooldown, is very spammable and stuns for many, many seconds.


[quote]
Now, this doesn't change the fact that stuns in DA were ridiculous at some points, I'm not arguing that. [/quote]

That's a start.




[quote]
At least you're honest enough to say,  "for my taste" in this. Just because YOU dislike it, doesn't make it a bad game.[/quote] 

It does make it a worse game for me and for everyone else that dislikes this (regeneration) or other elements.

[quote]
 Sure, regeneration mechanic could've been done differently (personally, I don't mind it) but it sure is tenfold better than the resting system of Ye Olde RPGs such as BG series or Fallout (whoopie-doo let's just make camp for a couple weeks in the middle of this evil dungeon, and let the world wait while we fix up our spells and injuries). [/quote]

Haha, pardon me, but this is a bit nonsensical.
So you prefer a system where you constantly have full HP/Mana and can get rid of all injuries with cheap injury kits or by going to the camp to a system where you cannot rest in certain areas (all up to the designers) and can decide alone to restrict resting if you want to pump up the challenge? On the other hand, I can't decide NOT to regenerate HP/mana in DA.

Therefore, it's the opposite, resting systems are 10 times better than forced perma regeneration.


[quote]
All in all, I can certainly agree with you that DA has plenty of flaws, especially combat-related mechanic stuff - but it's not what the game is about. [/quote]

Agreed with the first part, but not with the second. It depends. For me, and I believe for many others, a good combat system and no level scaling is essential.



[quote]edit: as far as the level-scaling stuff and a lot of AI/whatever issues go, I think you're just looking into it too hard. Personally, I didn't really feel the horrendous horrors of horrible level-scaling on my two playthroughs at all; if you don't think about it, you don't even see it - and it's not like it actually makes the game worse in any way? Compared to fx Baldur's Gate, quite frankly I rather like my level scaling (and yes, I played BG a LOT, feel free to call me a BW fanboy now and discard any of my comments based on that).[/quote]

Try to understand that it is very important for many people.
The funny thing is that there are two groups of people; one that hates level scaling and the other that doesn't really care. So, I'd think the obvious choice would be to not ****** off the one group that cares about this element, but no..


[quote]
The pulling stuff... First time I heard about that was on these forums. In my eyes, it's pretty close to using a bug or a cheat code to get free levels / items / gold / whatever, then complain about the game being too easy. Obviously you're not supposed to pull monsters one by one from whatever groups - code oversight? Most likely.[/quote]

I don't know if it's an oversight or intended, but it shouldn't be there in the first place.

[quote]

Don't use it if you hate it so much, voila, problem gone. [/quote]

Hate it? You mean.. if I think it's imbalanced?

R00fles. You know.. this is the king of the silly arguments.

"Hey dexterity is imba, please balance it to match the other stats"
Answer: "Just don't use dexterity if you think it's too powerful, voila.."

Lulz

[quote]
edit2: on topic of overpowered abilities / class combinations, you also have to remember that single-player RPGs aren't exactly built to be 'powerplayed' the way MMOs or RTS games are.
[/quote]

It's a single-player rpg, but it doesn't mean that abilities shouldn't be balanced. I want to think a bit about what to choose among well balanced abilities, and not have insta win options and insta cripple-self options.

[quote]
Oh and please, don't use BG2 as a good example of an RPG that works well without level scaling[/quote]

It's actually a good example. Sure, with some loot like celestial fury you'll plow through everything, but that's not a problem of level-or-non-level scaling.

[quote]
Or you could just roll a kensai/mage dual-class and solo the whole game, lol. Talk about overpowered.[/quote]


Follow your own advice and "don't use it if you hate it". Lulz

I never use a full party so that certainly makes my playthrough more challenging.


***


Aries1001, I really haven't noticed more xvarts, but I'm fairly certain bosses don't scale in BG 1. You can use this program called character creator (for IE games) and check for yourself. There are no scaled alternatives for bosses or anything else.


***


Skelli, yes, there cannot be 100 responses for each node, I was talking about a wish for a more neutral tone of responses. And simple responses without feeding too many words into my character's mouth. Cosmetics, not crucial in any way, yes.
Now I remember it was more something like "I don't consider you a friend Zevran". This sounds way less harsh than "We're not friends". Ok, I was wrong to expect a complex dialog and to expect that was not a shut down response. My bad.

[Dieover]

Kevin Lynch wrote...

I disagree that criticisms would be in vain. It's unfortunate that it isn't a balanced review and is entirely focused on the negative, which doesn't lend itself well to getting the points across. Despite my own high praise for DA:O (i.e. one of the best RPGs in years), I could compile a list of annoyances and write a review that would be as negative, albeit shorter, as this one. Too, the tone of it, from introduction to conclusion, is deliberately insulting the reader in an attempt to draw in arguments and flames from other forum members. Of course, it's self-fulfilling. If it had been written making only the clear points of why you dislike it, it would have been more effective and useful to the community.

Really, despite your assumption that every reader is dismissive of criticisms of their favorite game, there are a lot of people (including the developers) who appreciate them as insight into what may have gone wrong and what they can improve.

well said.

The OP is taking things for granted and on the other hand, hes insulting the game for minor detail and such which I didn't even notice (floating plants). It would be better if he would input some suggestions to improve the game based on his negative finds.

We also doesn't know if he even play the game, maybe he just watch his room mate having so much fun he had to make a negative review base on his viewing experience?

The only thing i agree with the OP is the chain stun that last to long but the update fixed it. The rest is review base on a bad day.

Modifié par Dieover, 18 décembre 2009 - 01:03 .

[Astranagant]

Here's a better method of analyzing a game than a detailed point-by-point examination of every combat calculation and formula:



Is it fun? Y/N



If Y, it is a good game.



If N, it is not a good game.



DAO is fun, therefore, it is a good game.

[Sethronu]

So you prefer a system where you constantly have full HP/Mana and can get rid of all injuries with cheap injury kits or by going to the camp to a system where you cannot rest in certain areas (all up to the designers) and can decide alone to restrict resting if you want to pump up the challenge?

On the other hand, I can't decide NOT to regenerate HP/mana in DA.

 

This coming from a guy who later on goes to post ...

R00fles. You know.. this is the king of the silly arguments.

 "Hey dexterity is imba, please balance it to match the other stats"
Answer: "Just don't use dexterity if you think it's too powerful, voila.."

You know, if you are looking to pick fights, it's far better done outside of your room, perhaps in a bar or after lessons in your high school - you'll learn far more from it than whilst doing so on the internet.

But hey, whatever floats your boat

[skotie]

@ the topic question, I found dragon age to be an awesome game, definitely worth the money, sure they have areas they could have improved on, really any game does. But overall I think they did a good job, I suspect the sequel to be even better than the first.

[Tin Soldier]

Tassiaw wrote...

I have a hard time taking the opinion of someone who pirated the game seriously. I also find it amusing that you say in your OP that it's a review, and then turn around and say it's not a review, just a list of things you didn't like about the game.

Not every game is going to appeal to you. I absolutely hate war shooters, but millions of people love them. They're not for me. Dragon Age is not for you.

Go back to Warcraft.

OK, you're the second or third (or fourth) person who has implied or outright stated that the OP is a pirate.  What evidence do you wish to present to back up this accusation?

[Arvay5]

you have a few good points but you are critical about this game.... also dont even get started mentioning blizzard in this lol they know nothing on how to make a good rpg game they just make wow because ppl are obsessed with it... but it completely destroys all of the wow lore and they have nerfed everything so much the gameplay is bland and repetitive. They do however know how to make good strategy games but thats about it.

Modifié par Arvay5, 18 décembre 2009 - 01:49 .

[Eurypterid]

Tin Soldier wrote...

Tassiaw wrote...

I have a hard time taking the opinion of someone who pirated the game seriously. I also find it amusing that you say in your OP that it's a review, and then turn around and say it's not a review, just a list of things you didn't like about the game.

Not every game is going to appeal to you. I absolutely hate war shooters, but millions of people love them. They're not for me. Dragon Age is not for you.

Go back to Warcraft.

OK, you're the second or third (or fourth) person who has implied or outright stated that the OP is a pirate.  What evidence do you wish to present to back up this accusation?

An excellent point, especially when the OP stated on page one of this thread that he was given the game as as gift.

So people, let's stop the accusations of 'pirate' and get on with the discussion.

[Paromlin]

Tin Soldier wrote...

Tassiaw wrote...

 who pirated the game seriously.

Go back to Warcraft.

OK, you're the second or third (or fourth) person who has implied or outright stated that the OP is a pirate.  What evidence do you wish to present to back up this accusation?

Don't bother, Tin Soldier, s/he has probably already forgotten about this topic and resumed playing her favorite rpg; Pac-Man.

S/he should really stop reading that notebook on "10 ways how to nitpick things out of proportion and post irrelevant stuff" though. Review or not review... Letz discuz. <rollzy>

[Tin Soldier]

Paromlin wrote...

Don't bother, Tin Soldier, s/he has probably already forgotten about this topic and resumed playing her favorite rpg; Pac-Man.

S/he should really stop reading that notebook on "10 ways how to nitpick things out of proportion and post irrelevant stuff" though. Review or not review... Letz discuz.

Sigh.