Kidd
No i dont disagree. In fact i agree.
But he is talking about PnP games, with a human GM leading the game.
I would say this though. Computer RPGs have made a mistake in trying to become computer PnP games way too much, after a certain point in history. And that point is Fallout.
See, Fallouts gestalt was something devs stumbled into, almost by accident. Its roots are in PnP games but... the gestalt of the game (which cannot be foreseen or preplanned) achieved something else. Became something else.
It became something... new, something that owned itself.
Where "that" didnt really need to try to become even more of a computerized PnP game anymore. But it needed evolution and improvement on its best features or removal or redesign of its biggest flaws.
Instead of that, we got facepalm3.
First person abomination.
Also, i like the third zen moment very much.
Now, i didnt say that character skill is all there should be. That player skill should have no input. That would be a ludicrous concept leading into watching a movie of the game based on your starting character build, if that.
In Fallout players decision influence the gameplay - but in confluence with the skill set - which the player skill cannot override.
And it is a fluid sliding scale. Not a rigid structure.
If it was rigid that would be too easy. Then you could know exactly what amount or percentage of player vs character skill there should be.
thanks for the article.
boy, those OLD games were so good.
so good...
:licks the screen:
One can indeed understand a viewpoint while still disagreeing with it. A completely alien concept to some people who think their opinion is law, certainly, but nevertheless it is possible.
Look turd.... not only are you a brainless simpleton, but youre also extremely stupid shitfaced idiot.
You dont understand a godamn thing and all your posts about this have proven it.
the only thing you understand is how to make stupid weak ad hominem replies and create some sort of idiotic strawman arguments in a pathetic attempt to reinforce your idiotic emotional engagement.
It uses stats but player skill can and does override them.
You dont understand the distinction.
While in Morrowind you can kite and climb rocks and shit your attacks hitting are still based on stats. If you have a zero in swords and you sit there whacking a sword forever no matter how much skill you have you're going to lose, because you won't ever hit or hit like one in a thousand times.[/QUOTE]
Yes moron. But i can still win. And all that proves - as i already said you fucking imbecile - that the game where the player cannot override the character skill is always a better RPG. Or, - the more the game lets the player override the character skill - the less of an RPG and more of a fucking Larping simulator it IS.
This is visible by the very example of Morrowind versus newer TES games.
Which proves - again - you do not understand the fucking distinction.
Will i need to repeat this again in the next post too, moron?
For example, in a fight with some enemy - i, despite my lack of skill with a sword, can still win the combat using a sword (lets just imagine thats the only weapon i can find) through my own skill of dodging, kiting and hitting that motherfucker much more times then it would otherwise be possible.
Because the AI pathfinding is shit in Morrowind, yes.
Thats just one quick easy simple example how a player skill can override character skill.
pathfinding faults is not a good enough excuse. In fact, it only makes the player dominance over character skills even clearer.
But its a good example on why the Turn Based combat is better for True RPG then any form or RT combat.
Rake
Also how did the DA discusion and a random quote from DalekFlay and me about FP and isometric turned to 2 pages of people jumping in defence of one viepoint or the other when it's clear that,preference aside, both have their uses depending on the kind of game you want to make?
By Codex Condensation, of course.
So.... fucking ....what? 
