"I don't know. Maybe I would because I like soldier better? That seems like a fair enough reason." - this was a general reason why maybe you would rather play a class other than demo. It was unnecessary to the topic and sort of passive aggressive. I'm sorry.

The entirety of the post after that does not revolve around that, though. It revolves around the entire idea of a class only being as good as the players playing it are, the players playing against them and the situations at any given time. Base stats only means so much and comparing them to stats of other weapons is a bit redundant considering.

"why would you play soldier in 12v12 if you could just be demo instead"

I don't know. Maybe I would because I like soldier better? That seems like a fair enough reason.

Another reason could be simply because a class is only as good as the person playing it and the people that person is playing with and against. You can throw base stats at me all you want. "Demo is capable of dealing this much damage this quickly because of this weapon's damage parameters!" This doesn't mean shit if the person behind the wheel is worse than those they are against, making these stats irrelevant, or if said person is better than those they are playing against, also making these stats irrelevant.

I can walk into a pub right now on soldier and I guarantee that I will outplay more of the demos on the other team than they will me. Why? Because I'm better than the average demo pub player, even more so the average pub player in general. Does this mean soldier is overpowered? Well, why play demo in 12v12 when you could just play soldier?

I should probably throw in the whole concept of "class gimmicks". You know, the thing that makes this game what it is. Class gimmicks and a player's in/ability to play any of the given classes, most of the time, prevents these classes from truly being over/underpowered, or "in need" of a nerf or buff.

I mean, you have all of these different factors that come into play when figuring out how balanced each class is. Some of these factors are things like: class gimmicks, the weapons used, a player's skill, maps, the endless amount of possible situations, and hell, even possible situations that can be produced within other possible situations. There are so many factors.

The point I'm making here is that if a class was actually overpowered, it would be obvious as shit.

You would think that if the class was actually overpowered, then it'd be a lot more obvious and there would be more people in agreement. Every time this stupid "debate" happens, it's only less than a handful of people constantly trying to prove a point that doesn't exist.

TF2 is a teamwork focused game. That should be obvious 7 years in. If you honestly believe demo is overpowered, then you must not be playing with much teamwork.

Man, there would be a lot more incentive to give a shit about these nerf/buff discussions if anything useful came from it other than figuring out who does and doesn't have any clue how the game works.

Yeah. Defeating the Pride Demon was difficult because of the camera, albeit not being too bad.

When you have to

, the camera would move only so far back before it automatically entered tactical view, which is an uncomfortable transition when that's not what you're trying to do, and makes it more difficult to get the angle you should otherwise be able to reach easily.

I mean aside from that, I have no problems with it. I don't even have a problem with holding m1 or R to auto-attack. In fact, I'm not really sure why that's a problem, but to each their own.

As far as looting goes, you apparently, from my experience, can't loot when any dialogue is happening. This even means a random NPC's small talk when you're in the general vicinity. This is more "wtf why" than anything. I hope it gets changed.

You can press or hold R to attack as well. Not sure if that helps your problem any, but it's there.

DA:I was released today and I've played a little bit of it. So far I have only defeated the first boss, or at least what seemed to feel like one. The game so far feels very much like a modern day Origins but better. So far, anyway. As far as combat goes, it's been pretty solid and fluid. While it does seem like real time combat works fine, managing the combat via tactical view to plan every party member's immediate actions feels like it's going to be incredibly important to learn and use later on.

The romance is still a thing, as well as party approval/disapproval to your decisions. Your decisions can also impact what you will be doing and how things around you react. A little side note here: these kinds of features are awesome and make games that much better.

I don't know how much of an open world it is yet, but I've got a suspicion that it will be open world a la Origins with a little more accessibility. The part I have played was more or less a "tutorial". It didn't necessarily throw itself at me as one, but it had a slight tutorial vibe.

Whatever the case, I'm actually having fun with this. It will probably suck up all my time until Witcher 3.

Anyway, who else has played it/is playing it? What are your thoughts?

I don't know if you're being serious, but how do you suggest Gully last over the cap time of Badlands last???

beedrill is the best pokemon in the series.

That was pretty shitty.

FUCKIN WEEGEE

here we go with the invisible players complaint again. this has either become some type of meme or some people honestly believe they haven't acknowledged it.

Thanks for the demos and music suggestions, everyone! Let's get more in, or this entire video might as well be an airshot compilation.

bump~

so far a good amount of people added me, but let's keep them rolling in.

A few months after the game released. As far as competitive goes, I believe it was mid 2010? Maybe a bit sooner.

is that you, king ghidorah?