Anyone playing Skyrim?

rec’d for depressing/exciting accuracy

and I’m playing it on my laptop so link cables aren’t really a possibility. Plus I don’t really like children.

I ashamed.

I do what might be described as grinding. I pick up ingredients for potions whenever I’m walking by (I don’t seek them out), or if they are laying about on someone’s table.

I do smith all the metal I can (I haven’t maxed out the perks, so Elven is the best I can do). I also smith all gems into jewelry.

I do save one high-end soul gem for something special if I need it, but otherwise I enchant everything I can.

I have a maxed out house in Winterhaven, but I’ve not even been in another city yet. I do store a lot in my chest (particularly the Dragon bone/scales for future armor making).

I’ve been splitting my level-ups between health and stamina evenly.

I think my highest skill is bow and I’m at about 75 now, I think. Perhaps I’m just too much of a jack-of-all trades and should focus more on a few skills, rather than spending so much time on all of them.

I’m not surprised you wouldn’t understand.

But so far it’s shaping up to be my favorite in the series (ACR > AC2 > ACB > AC1).

First off, I hated Altair’s VA in the first one, and the new one is such a cut above. I’m actually finding myself caring about Altair this time around, and I’m only 3 Altair missions in (and from I’ve heard, the final two are awesome).

Secondly, the new faces was a result of newer, better facial capture technology. For Desmond, it’s awkward cause he looks like David Blaine. For Ezio, though, I love it. I hated the fact that 17 year old Ezio and 40+ year old Ezio looked exactly the same except for he had a beard. Ezio looks old, world weary, and ready to give up. And that’s kind of a reflection of his attitude in this game. He’s very short-tempered, he’s lost some of his compassion (remember how he used to say a little thing for each person he killed? Yeah, that became “Rest in Peace, bastard.”). It’s an Ezio that’s just tired of a struggle he sees no way of winning, and only hoping to find some answers to help put his mind at ease. It even changes his interactions with others. His friendly banter is now more straight forward and direct. He’s incredibly short with his new apprentices (by the way, LOVE that each recruit usually has a unique story mission for recruitment, obtaining the rank of Assassin, and then Master Assassin). But yeah, to get to my original point, the changes were a bit jarring for Desmond, but I felt they were upgrades for Ezio and Altair.

Den Defense didn’t suck so much as it felt horribly out-of-place. The mechanics were fine and simple for a tower defense game other than Ezio being kinda in the way. The fact that you could lock up your Assassin’s Dens at any time to prevent this was good, though, and by the 3rd sequence I had sealed them all up (I did it 3 times for the challenge thing).

Each of the three games presented their villains in different ways:

2 gave you the maestro early on, while having you unravel the mystery along the way to the top. It’s interesting, because Rodrigo ordered the deaths of your family, yet you had to work your way up through the ladder to reach him and uncover the conspiracy.

Brotherhood was straight forward with you: here’s the main villain (look at the trailer), everything you do is working towards killing this man. That might sound like 2, but the key difference is Cesare was all up in your face about it, whereas Rodrigo operated from the shadows, and did more misdirection than direct involvement. Taking down Rodrigo was all about unraveling the conspiracy (plus fist-fighting the pope is awesome), whereas Cesare it was all about throwing him out of power. The fact that you finally killed him doesn’t hold much weight because he had already lost. Cesare had lost the moment he was dragged off by Papal guards, completely losing any satisfaction. Dispatching Lieutenants one by one to get to Rodrigo was far more satisfying.

Revelations is going a completely new direction so far: misdirection. Rather than having a shadowy figure pulling the puppet strings or a direct in-your-face villain, it’s all about introducing “potential villains.” And I personally love this approach. It changes everything about character interactions. Everything they say to each other, can be misconstrued as true sincerity, hiding an alliterative motive, or something else. In a scene early on, Tarik speaks freely about Ahmet’s ability to rule, and gives brutally honest answer to him. Ahmet becomes upset, but it begs the question: does Tarik seek to actively remove Ahmet as next in line, or was he just making a painfully obvious observation? Is he working for the Templars or merely preparing Ahmet for the criticism he will face? In a later sequence, when Tarik is revealed to be supplying a former man in line to the disposed Byzantine throne with weapons, Suleiman I orders the immediate execution of Tarik once Ezio finds and tracks him. Yet, Ezio is reluctant, almost believing that something is amiss. Is Ezio right here, perhaps Tarik is simply planning something against the Byzantines? Maybe Suleiman I knows about this whole thing and is sending Ezio into a trap by Tarik? Maybe it’s simple as Tarik is about to betray Suleiman I to the templars, or possibly Ahmet. And Ahmet and Suleiman I are on uncertain terms as well. Just look at their interactions while playing chess. Even Suleiman I is taking shots at Ahmet’s future reign. I have no idea WHO to trust and I love it. 2 was very straight forward that their villains were villains, and it was all about finding motivations. Now, we’re trying to piece together motivations based on actions with no set-in-stone allegiance, and it now makes every action come under a huge microscope. These stories always intrigue, especially when you look back and reflect on the actions AFTER everything is revealed.

Not to mention the gameplay changes: getting rid of horses (yay), introducing the hookblade for easier/faster travel (super yay!) and the bombs (fun to mess around with, not required too much). The setting is much better (Constantinople is JUST below Venice in terms of areas, but significantly better than the half barren too many damn cliffs Rome), and evoking a certain level of life and activity compared to most other areas in the game.

Revelations is what Brotherhood should have been, and skipping Brotherhood really wouldn’t loose anything of value story-wise. I do agree that the ending, while certainly WTF-worthy, offered a satisfying conclusion to Ezio’s story while setting up Desmond for future games. I’m not going to comment on an ending I haven’t seen yet, and I do expect cryptic crap that doesn’t forward much in the modern age, but by the sounds of (plus the additional Embers movie) is that Ezio and Altair reach a conclusion that settles everything out for them. When I actually beat the game, I’ll come back in here and comment fully on that.

Here’s the thing: AC2 is my top game of this generation. I will not back down from this. So for me to say Revelations is on it’s way to topping it? That means, in my book, this is a “holy shit this is an amazing game” moment. Revelations is making up for the Brotherhood misstep by a LOT. It’s pretty damn impressive that game, which outside of that awesome trailer, I was rather unsure about, ends up being my favorite game of this generation. Now, obviously I have to finish everything up because it can take that crown, but so much improvement in so many ways gameplay-wise over the previous two, plus a stronger story, I don’t see how it can make enough mistakes going forward for it not to be. They’d have to be huge.

First off, fighting in ACR is actually fun again. AC it was just kinda blah, AC2 it was much improved, ACB it was too easy, and in ACR it was perfect. When you’ve got a good mix group of enemies fighting in ACR is a lot like a dance. Your blocking and slashing and dodging all while avoiding knife throws, bullets, and cherry bombs. Gone are the 20 kill streaks of ACB.

Story wise, I found Ezio’s main tale in this slightly lacking. Killing the templars just wasn’t as enticing because there was no main bad guy. But they did a good job making up for this with the Den defense’s and the Master Assassin missions (why did the Borgia never try to reclaim their towers?). To me the real draw of this game was the Sophia missions where you could see how Ezio’s heart was drawing him to settle down. That’s where the real story was at in this game. Ezio’s ending in this game was beautful and I also feel like they did an awesome job with Desmonds too.

Overall I really loved ACR. They improved a lot of things from fighting to money earning to managing your assassins. I’m excited to see where it goes next.

Only good thing about 360 is in-game music….

I am a n00b. :( I haven’t played a console since PS2.

all played on an 8ft HD screen.

Heaven.

And once I get up to 100, I’m gonna double-enchant the fuck outta all that shit.

Does combining three ingredients with the same affect create any more potent outcome than two ingredients? And are some ingredients more potent than others?

I know because I’m right there with you!