Vault Dweller said:
That's a fact, that didn't have to be proven. Some events affect future, some don't. An RPG may have a plot that makes past event non-affecting or not. My point was that if you pick a plot affected by past events, it would be impossible to reflect all choices your character could have made. Your solution seemed to be a plot unaffected by past events like the out-of-the-blue invasion.
Ok, the invasion happens no matter what. However, your past choices DO have an effect on your resources for dealing with this invasion. Either you control everything, and can order troops in ahead of you to soften things up a little or you are ordered by someone else to go in and have no help at all.
You're only problem at that point is whether a Sith Lord Emporer would do his own fighting. Well, let's assume that he would for whatever reason. Maybe he just wants to, or he doesn't think any of his underlings can do the job properly, or maybe 5 stormtroopers die for every Vong they kill or something.
I can even imagine a scenario where you start off the game giving orders to invade bases and such as the Sith Lord, then the next day results are reported to you and basically everyone, including any underling Sith you sent out, got their ass kicked. Only real option then is for you to step up and show why you're the emporer!
Because of the above, I've narrowed it down a bit, but just because I did, doesn't mean I'm not aware of or completely dismiss different opinions.
Instead you just label people `Dumbfuck!!! if they happen to have those differing opinions... right?
I believe we've already been there. You know my position, I know yours. The end.
Yours is wrong though...
Never played those, so can't comment. Feel free to use examples from them, I'll take your word for it.
How about the Metal Gear games? Same basic idea, large over-reaching plot told in important subplots. I don't feel like explaining the entire plotline of both series really...
Plus they aren't CRPGs and don't offer any choices at all, though you do have multiple options for dealing with challenges in Metal Gear games. I was just making the point that just because a game doesn't blurt out the entire storyline at once does not mean it has to feel incomplete. Or even if they do these series are both quite popular in spite of that.
That would work, but it seems unlikely that a publisher would be interested in such a scenario, at least for an RPG. A ToEE sequel sounds like a no-brainer, considering that ToEE did ok, and the engine, rules, etc are ready, and most bugs have been already dealt with. Yet, there is nothing on the horizon.
*sigh* Don't remind me.
Anyways I'd just like to remind you that you said this: "I would have gladly admitted that I'm wrong if I saw a convincing argument or example. "
As for publisher interest, there is a series on PS2 called .Hack, in which the entire plotline is broken up into 4 shorter games. In fact, I just noticed you can even import your character from game to game. I haven't played them, so don't know about choices and such... but the idea itself is there and proves publishers would do this.
That's why I said "intelligence" and "psychology".
So anything that thinks like a human is a human? Such a grouping seems largely useless, unless you are trying to prove your point by using a terrible analogy.
I suggested one a while back... I guess no one liked it...
Technically, yes. Practically, you are everyone's bitch (except for rats, household pets, and other lvl1 losers)
And at level 10 you're everyon's bitch, except for some of the things lower than level 9. At level 20 you are STILL the bitch of everything 20+.
That's how I see it, and since I don't force anyone to accept it as the only correct definition, I don't see what exactly we are arguing about. I said something, you asked me why, I explained, and that's where the story ends. I separate char development (commonly accepted term) into two phases for my own amusement, you don't. What's the big deal?
The big deal is that you are trying to use your concept of char development as an argument to convince me that character importation is a bad idea. See how communication can break down when people insist on using their own personal definitions? Try having a discussion about racism with a white person who thinks they've been a victim of it because of THEIR own personal definition.
Had I discounted your opinion, I would have not argued with you. I haven't labeled you either. It's not my thing.
You have brought my title up at the start of every discussion we've had so far. That's not labeling? I didn't even NOTICE the illiterate tag until you made reference to it...
I said story-driven, not "a very strong story". And as for the puzzles, there is a reason why we have 2 separate genres: adventure and puzzles, you know.
I wouldn't exactly call Kings Quest story driven either. My memory could be foggy, but I don't remember the story being more complex than the story for Contra or any other old game really. Hell Action Adventure games like Legend of Zelda are basically "Princess was kidnapped, go rescue her!" Final Fantasy seems pretty story driven by comparison, where every time you finish off some event another piece of storyline drives you into the next event.
Or do you have your own little definition of "story driven" too?
I said *like* an adventure game. For a guy who takes things literally, you sure like to twist words and assume stuff
No, you said it *sounds like* an adventure game. The usual connotation of a statement like that is that you are saying it's so similar to an adventure game it doesn't make a difference.
I'd say that "both" fits my position, but for the sake of an argument: you said that my character means "my ownership over it", so, when I play as, say, Revan in KOTOR, does it mean that I own this character? I wonder what Lucas Arts has to say about that...
Look, <a href="http://www.onelook.com/?w=your&ls=a">"your"</a> is nothing but the possesive form of "you." There is nothing in it that implies creation.
As for LucasArts, I believe they own <i>the rights to the character</i>, not the character itself.
Creation doesn't necessarily give you ownership either, just ask RA Salvatore who created Drizzt do'Urden... a character "owned" by WoTC.
Sure. Like Silent Storm. A thief was just an example. Such a character wouldn't fit into battlefields, but a character with sneaking and silent killing abilities would - a Scout.
Are you being deliberately obtuse? There is no need at all for sneaking skills. Nothing in your definition requires it. If there is no sneaking skill included there is no need for sneaking related solutions to challenges.
Look at Diablo II. There are no classes which have any reason whatsoever to be sneaky, are there? So how could you fault the game for not having stealthy quest solutions?
It's a manner that fits a pre-gen character, not yours.
Actually you choose to make the character a thief, then choose all the skills he trains in... that's not exactly pre-generated. Oh, and again "yours" does not in any way connotate creation or even customization. Did you build <i>your</i> computer? <i>Your</i> car? <i>Your</i> house? I guess those aren't yours because they were pregenerated?
Similarly you can argue that you are playing that marine in Quake in a manner fitting his skills and abilities since he's so handy at staying alive and killing things. Now, your character in System Shock 2 for example, who's basically in the same situation, actually has skills and abilities that fit the character. Unlike Quake's marine the SS2 guy must deal with locked doors, security systems, computers, maintaining weapons, and even research of whatever the hell is attacking him. While the skillset is neither complete nor perfect, it's enough to allow you to play in manner fitting your character
But nothing in your definition requires character creation, picklock, weapon maintenance, computer or hacking skills. Or does all that logically derive from "ability?"
Note also that you just said it was ok to have an incomplete skillset, at what point exactly does it become complete? For instance if SS2 were set in the past the only skill still necessary would be lockpicking, right? So would a gmae with JUST a lockpick skill and combat skills have a "complete enough" skillset? If so then why is lockpicking so important?
First, in Quake, which is what we were discussing before, the marine always shoots where I point the gun.
Yes, the Quake Marine has enough firearms skill to shoot exactly where you intended. The DeusEx guy does not have that much skill to start. Not to mention you are using the Quake Marines running and jumping ability, his ability to keep fighting after taking 20 shots in the face, and his ability to know how to reload a BFG.
If my accuracy is good, then he's good. Second, in Deus Ex, player's accuracy still plays a major role. The character skills reduce recoil (I think) and increase damage. I don;t recall for sure, but I remember that I didn't have any problems using a sniper rifle with no or minimum rifle skill at the beginning.
I vaguely remember from the demo that when you are aiming the crosshair moves around slightly or something, and that the higher the characters skill the less it moves around.
The same goes for the pistol. Even in Bloodlines were they tried to do some fancy aiming stuff, the biggest skill effects were damage and SMG recoil reduction. The aiming was up to you.
Essentially you are deciding where the bullet should go, and relying on the marine's skill to get it there. Right?
(This is why I needed time to think about the decision making aspect of my definition...