Apparently the commenting system doesn't link to the source you entered, but downloads the image from there and then hosts it. I've found the process can take a few minutes between posting the comment and the image showing up. I can see it now, though.

I don't know about game studios, but 3D TV shows and movies get physical models made ALL the time. It's helpful to have a physical thing you can pick up and look at from all angles. After it's been approved, 3D scanners translate the model into the computer where it can be set up for animation.

I've been playing videogames for almost 30 years now, but my first thought was "Tyranid", not "Zerg".

When you're creating 3D objects it's always best to have a physical model of something before you approve it to be in the game. It's helpful to be able to have it there in front of you, where you can see it from every angle, in a way you can do with a 3D model on a screen. I believe many (if not most) of Pixar's…

True, I would have thought it would show up earlier, but I'm glad they at least made a REASON for the change, rather than "oh wow I'm going to wear that dress because it's pretty and not at all because it's totally uncomfortable and impractical".

...which is why I said it's NOT something a woman would wear casually. Since she found it in Lady Comstock's airship, I'm assuming it was a dress for public occasions, where it was more important to be seen than to be comfortable. Although I think that describes 90% of women's dresses.

Would be nice. The DLC for Assassin's Creed 3 takes place in an alternate universe from the main story, and since it's selling well I imagine we'll see more alt-uni DLC for other games in the future.

The blue dress was obviously designed a long time ago, judging by its presence in early footage of the game. However, it's not something a woman would casually wear at home, which is the situation Elizabeth is in when we first meet her.

We've already had Ezio Auditore in a fighting game.

How so?

I think the stigma isn't so much that you have to "pay to win" on an otherwise free game, it's that you have to KEEP paying in order to stay competitive or on an even footing with other players.

Have you tried World of Tanks? I've been playing it for a couple days and it's great fun. Definitely not a "pay to win" game.

There are lots of industries someone can be in where they can say or do just about anything and nobody will care. Video games is NOT one of those industries. It's not at the level of scrutiny that Hollywood exists in, but it's getting close. Because it earns so much money, and because its technical nature puts it…

As others have pointed out, Twitter is public communication. Anything you say on Twitter can be seen by anyone and you have to keep that in mind. It's not email where you're entitled to privacy. It doesn't matter what kind of job you have, you have to watch what you say on Twitter.

More importantly, why are you asking ME? Ask someone on the Blizzard staff.

They might not make a new Lost Vikings game, but they've put them in some of their other games.

ETS2 is a great game... at first. Once you've driven a few routes, bought some trucks and drivers it becomes clear that's all there is to do. Drive, buy garages, buy trucks, hire drivers. Rinse, repeat. The only way to go bankrupt is if you aim to do it deliberately.

Maybe the DLC for the game will expand or improve upon it.

I wish they'd release a version of that for PS3 so I could play it again. :(

I agree with you on most points, but I think the "focused, authored" approach can be a good thing when there's a solid story to tell, like in this game. As a result it was more linear than most people like, but personally, I play games for the STORY, so BI was a delight in that respect.