1eyedking Japanese games are shit. Here's why.

[FeelTheRads]

rest of the post is just more trying-too-hard

Yes, yes, you are one of those awesome liberal, sure on your sexuality people and I'm just a closet faggot. It's the only explanation for not liking Japanese vomit.

What the fuck was trying too hard? Describing exactly what's in the pictures? Do you see something else in those pictures?

The question was if you can take seriously something that likes like that, yes?

But hey, that's your answer when you're cornered: HAHAHA UR VOLORN U TRY TO HADR

 

[Phelot]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xuXkVzBdJQ&feature=related

Considering the japs are supposed to be filled with faggotry, the west hasn't been able to create such testosterone filled stupidity such as the above.

That was some intense boulder rolling

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

who the fuck knows, but roshambo is an OLD fucking reference, whatever happened to that guy? he used to post on nma

He's working on his secret secret project and never did any market...
Oh shit!

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Yes, yes, you are one of those awesome liberal, sure on your sexuality people and I'm just a closet faggot. It's the only explanation for not liking Japanese vomit.

What? Why is it always about faggotry? What are you trying to hide?

What the fuck was trying too hard? Describing exactly what's in the pictures? Do you see something else in those pictures?

Yeah. You tried so hard you did a 180º and ended up sounding like a gamespotter.

LOL IS THAT DOLL THING SUPPOSED TO BE ME LOL KIDDY GAME THANK GOD FOR GEARS OF WAR

The question was if you can take seriously something that likes like that, yes?

Yeah. Well, as seriously as you can take a game.

But hey, that's your answer when you're cornered: HAHAHA UR VOLORN U TRY TO HADR

But you do that every other post...why shouldn't I treat you like Volourn if you're just gonna say "lol bullshit" over and over?

 

[Alex]

There is something about Japanese games, at least the ones that I played (which I admit aren't such a varied lot), that leave me a little cold. Let me try to explain:

Most Japanese games I have played seemed to avoid "creative" gameplay. That is, gameplay that encourages creative thinking of the player by using open ended rules. Rather, most games seem to thrive in exploration gameplay, making the user try to find the right answer (frequently by trial and error, sometimes by clues).

For example, there is a mini-game in a game called Legend of Mana, which allows you to customize your equipment by adding various random items with it. Each item you add to your equipment has certain effects once it is added and other effects once it becomes a "card" (happens when you add another item, not all items become cards). Each card and item may have certain effects when it enters the item and when it leaves your equipment (each armor/weapon/accessory can hold only 3 cards, with the last one being pushed away when another card is added). This sounds like a quite nice system, but my beef with it is that most of its gameplay is in discovering how all things work.

At first you aren't aware what cards are associated with which items, you aren't aware that items only become cards after you add another item, you aren't aware what the effects of each card and you aren't aware that the item may need certain essence levels in order for a card to appear. And while the cards can affect you directly (like raising an attribute or something), there are many that actually affect how the items you add further affect your equipment. So, the game is more about figuring how this system works than it is about using it to create interesting combinations. The point is more about trying to find out what the designers were thinking than creating your own combinations.

My problem with the above isn't that it is ridiculously hard to find out the rules of the system, nor that it would require a huge amount of grinding. My problem is more that this seems a common trend in most Japanese games that I have played. Another example: someone mentioned (maybe it was in the JRPG thread) that the tactics on some JRPG were akin to puzzles where you have to find out which specific combination of abilities and demons to use against a boss. It seems to me that this is a very frequent trend, Japanese designers restricting the possibilities within a game in order to control the difficulty exactly, rather than providing open ended systems that might be "gamed" and cause difficulty to be too small or great in certain parts.

I don't mean to say I dislike all Japanese games. I like a lot of them, I love the old 2d Mario games and I liked that JRPG Terranigma. But I wanted to know if you people agree this is a tendency of eastern games and if you have examples of games where the player was allowed a good deal of freedom in approaching his goal and the game responded well to that. A good and simple example of this would be Sim City, I think (you can create whatever type of city you want and the system will create challenges based on your earlier decisions).

By the way, to the people talking about winning or losing the argument. I am sorry, maybe I missed a few key posts that lead you to say that, but I am barely seeing an argument here. What seemed to happen is that people mostly argued about graphics and art direction (with gameplay barely mentioned at all) and basically talked over each other, with lots of small posts that tried to ridicule the other side's argument.

I think that what Lyric Suite asked isn't that far fetched. If one of you played a Japanese game that you felt was really important or great for whatever reasons, why not make a detailed post about it? Show why its gameplay is good (or maybe innovative, or whatever). Show how its various elements come together in a cohesive whole. Show why possible problems one might see (anime sucks or whatever) don't actually detract from it. I agree this is a little too much effort, especially if the other side will simply ignore your post and say everything sucks, but if people are really interested in discussing these games, I don't see any other reasonable alternatives.

 

[Phelot]

snip.

I agree with this. I don't like gameplay that simply frustrates you by having you fail countless times until you figure out that Red Demon Megumifuckface needs red potion consumed along with green rune cast, then you steamroll it. That's not complexity, that's just random trial and error which is OK for a bit, but not when the entire game seems to be based on it. That's what I'm hearing from some of the jRPG experts here in their examples and it simply doesn't sound fun.

 

[FeelTheRads]

LOL IS THAT DOLL THING SUPPOSED TO BE ME LOL KIDDY GAME THANK GOD FOR GEARS OF WAR

Good find, a game from '88 and which still doesn't look like a little girl's toys. Maybe you'd like to look at the portraits too, btw.
Surprisingly, at that time, they could make portraits too, they didn't have to use the same graphics as the map ones, or whatever shit DamnedRegistrations tried to spout in defense of the graphics looking like toys.

Yeah. Well, as seriously as you can take a game.

Fucking flip-flops. "you can totally take JRPGs seriously... oh wait... games actually are not serious. "

Good stuff, now that only you can't judge graphics, you can't judge seriousness either. Why? Because then you might lose the argument.

That's the best you can do... games are not serious... I would be ashamed.

But you do that every other post...why shouldn't I treat you like Volourn if you're just gonna say "lol bullshit" over and over?

Really? Me? How about the likes of you and BC?

-JRPGs have no art direction
- lol bullshit
- JRPGs can't be takes seriously
- lol bullshit

etc

 

[Black Cat]

But I wanted to know if you people agree this is a tendency of eastern games and if you have examples of games where the player was allowed a good deal of freedom in approaching his goal and the game responded well to that. A good and simple example of this would be Sim City, I think (you can create whatever type of city you want and the system will create challenges based on your earlier decisions).

Indeed, it is a very marked tendency of those eastern games i have played, at least, though to be honest most of the japanese games I have played are either Bullet Hell games, Survival Horror games, Dungeon Crawlers, Plataformers, or Visual Novels, and all those genres are biased in favor of tightly designed challenges instead of open ended systems. I have mentioned elsewhere that this was one of the elements i actually liked about them, too: Back when I was playing Devil Survivor for the first time I never had to grind because I saw each mission as a puzzle instead of an open ended tactical challenge, and I enjoyed such thing. Facing some of the bosses, like Beelzebub or Baalberith, and thinking about the way the game rules work until you find the one way you can actually defeat them. There wasn't randomness involved: Either you got the system and made it work for you, or you didn't. If you didn't then you couldn't go forward without grinding, and that was your punishment.

I believe, for at least that's how it works for me, that this is part of what the people who like those games likes about them. There isn't roleplaying, there isn't make believe, there isn't a world to get immersed in. Instead you get challenges that you have to crack down, like a puzzle or a riddle: A really dificult pattern in a Bullet Hell boss that you need to study until you find the breach on it, and then you have to train until you become skilled enough to exploit that breach. A boss that's impossible for you to beat until you understand the way it works and fine tune your party to defeat him, a stage you have no chance of solving until you discover a particular way to apply the skills you have at your disposal in a precise combination and with a precise timing to reach that ledge that's out of reach, or to be trapped in a particular level until you are able to solve the obscure puzzle barring your way.

The western games that are praised here on The Codex usually don't have those elements, and many of those most mentioned around here (Fallout, Arcanum, Torment) are so bloody easy one can't help but smile when they go and talk about how new games play themselves. Sure, roleplaying your character and having the world react to your choices is fun, i guess, but that's what pen & paper clubs are there for, and most of those I have played in would revolt if the gamemaster were not to throw puzzle like bosses and puzzle like dungeons, and they would probably lynch anyone who tries to roll intelligence to solve a myst-like puzzle barring their way to the next area.

Western games like The Codex's favorites are better experiences, sure, and better stories, yeah, and better worlds, settings, and more, but the same freedom many enjoy about them makes them bloody easy in comparison to the things some of us enjoy in a game. And before someone mentions Baldur's Gate 2 or something like that go, get Devil Survivor, play Amane's way without grinding, and then survive that bloody battle slaughter that the stage just after defeating baalberith is. Sadistical doesn't even begins to describe it, and that's precisely what makes clearing that stage worth it. Almost no one has been able to do it without grinding, thus there is merit in doing so. There's no merit in clearing Planescape, nor Fallout, nor Arcanum. Anyone with half a brain can do it.

So it isn't we like japanese games because we are wapanese or some retarded motive like that (hell, regardless of my reputation here i can't stand most anime myself) but because they are almost the only ones still making games that are games instead of bloody toys.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Good find, a game from '88

Yeah, because I was using the average gamespotter as an example and..bah. Nevermind.

Yeah. Well, as seriously as you can take a game.

Fucking flip-flops. "you can totally take JRPGs seriously... oh wait... games actually are not serious. "

Good stuff, now that only you can't judge graphics, you can't judge seriousness either. Why? Because then you might lose the argument.

That's the best you can do... games are not serious... I would be ashamed.

See, that's what I'm talking about. You see "as seriously as you can take a game" and your tries-too-hard brain reads it as "games are not actually serious" (which is true, but that's beside the point)

Stop talking to the strawman CK in your head. Come back to us.

But you do that every other post...why shouldn't I treat you like Volourn if you're just gonna say "lol bullshit" over and over?

Really? Me? How about the likes of you and BC?

-JRPGs have no art direction
- lol bullshit
- JRPGs can't be takes seriously
- lol bullshit

etc

Nice arguments there, brah

This is retarded. If you do it, it's alright. If I do it, it's because I HAEV NO ARGUMENTNS LOLOLO

 

[Phelot]

Indeed, it is a very marked tendency of those eastern games i have played, at least, though to be honest most of the japanese games I have played are either Bullet Hell games, Survival Horror games, Dungeon Crawlers, Plataformers, or Visual Novels, and all those genres are biased in favor of tightly designed challenges instead of open ended systems. I have mentioned elsewhere that this was one of the elements i actually liked about them, too: Back when I was playing Devil Survivor for the first time I never had to grind because I saw each mission as a puzzle instead of an open ended tactical challenge, and I enjoyed such thing. Facing some of the bosses, like Beelzebub or Baalberith, and thinking about the way the game rules work until you find the one way you can actually defeat them. There wasn't randomness involved: Either you got the system and made it work for you, or you didn't. If you didn't then you couldn't go forward without grinding, and that was your punishment.

But how do you find the "correct" system? To me it sounds like by dying a bunch of times until you randomly find the correct way. Maybe I'm just not getting you, I don't know it just seems like these games require all kinds of spells and effects, but without actual tactical maneuvering like flanking, distractions, no? I mean, I don't get what's fun about casting random spells or skills until you find the one that hurts something. TBH, I'm just going by what you and some others here are saying so I don't really know all this for sure.

The western games that are praised here on The Codex usually don't have those elements, and many of those most mentioned around here (Fallout, Arcanum, Torment) are so bloody easy one can't help but smile when they go and talk about how new games play themselves. Sure, roleplaying your character and having the world react to your choices is fun, i guess

So, you just don't like that style. You aren't a "storyfag" so to speak. That's fine, but...

but that's what pen & paper clubs are there for, and most of those I have played in would revolt if the gamemaster were not to throw puzzle like bosses and puzzle like dungeons

They would? Or would they be more upset if there wasn't multiple ways to solve a problem, multiple ways to get around a boss, rather then just finding the correct exploit and grinding until you can pull it off? I like riddles and a lot of games use them, some work some don't, but how does that even relate to your points about boss challenges?

Western games like The Codex's favorites are better experiences, sure, and better stories, yeah, and better worlds, settings, and more, but the same freedom many enjoy about them makes them bloody easy in comparison to the things some of us enjoy in a game. And before someone mentions Baldur's Gate 2 or something like that go, get Devil Survivor, play Amane's way without grinding, and then survive that bloody battle slaughter that the stage just after defeating baalberith is. Sadistical doesn't even begins to describe it, and that's precisely what makes clearing that stage worth it. Almost no one has been able to do it without grinding, thus there is merit in doing so. There's no merit in clearing Planescape, nor Fallout, nor Arcanum. Anyone with half a brain can do it.

Ah, I remember another thread were you talk about the sort of challenges you enjoy. You're a masochist if I recall and that's ok. That's what you find fun. I recall you like arcade shooters, the sort were you need to be a severe autistic to avoid the random sprays of fire that fill 97% of the screen and were you are required to memorize complex attack patterns made by your enemy...

Yeah, well I really do enjoy a challenge, but not cheap ones like that. Not ones that require mathematical equations to avoid death.

If you do, that's fine. I tip my hat to you.

So it isn't we like japanese games because we are wapanese or some retarded motive like that (hell, regardless of my reputation here i can't stand most anime myself) but because they are almost the only ones still making games that are games instead of bloody toys.

I think we can both agree that games are for entertaining, correct? And a challenge can be entertaining, but so can experience or stories or the artistic merits of a game and I hope you're big enough not to say otherwise just because you feel threatened that some of the games you like are reviled by some here.

Personally, I'd prefer playing a wargame over what you're describing and they even sound similar, but I do appreciate that you seek a challenge in games, which is something that I'll certainly admit is missing from a lot of new games and also some older ones.

 

[Archibald]

But how do you find the "correct" system? To me it sounds like by dying a bunch of times until you randomly find the correct way. Maybe I'm just not getting you, I don't know it just seems like these games require all kinds of spells and effects, but without actual tactical maneuvering like flanking, distractions, no? I mean, I don't get what's fun about casting random spells or skills until you find the one that hurts something. TBH, I'm just going by what you and some others here are saying so I don't really know all this for sure.

Using brains helps, or so i heard.

 

[Black Cat]

But how do you find the "correct" system? To me it sounds like by dying a bunch of times until you randomly find the correct way. Maybe I'm just not getting you, I don't know it just seems like these games require all kinds of spells and effects, but without actual tactical maneuvering like flanking, distractions, no? I mean, I don't get what's fun about casting random spells or skills until you find the one that hurts something. TBH, I'm just going by what you and some others here are saying so I don't really know all this for sure.

You can play the battle i said on Devil Survivor, for example, all the times you want and, if you don't really understand the way the game works really well and think about a way to use such understanding to defeat all those unfair jerks assaulting you, you are going to get the same result no matter what you do. On those games i have mentioned the tactics in battle are just an extention of the, say, strategy outside of it: What demons do you have? What skills have you been inheriting? What skills have your characters been decrypting and learning? Etc, etc, etc.

When you hit a boss fight or a set piece battle it isn't about trying, failing, then trying again, and wining. There are three possible outcomes: You have a party that can steamroll the battle, which is the less common one, or either you have not such a party but have been playing in such a way you have a variety of options at your disposal, so then you start thinking about what tools you have and how you can use them to clear the situation, or you have been ignoring entire parts of the game system and thus you must grind until you are strong enough to brute force your way through the situation or until you have acquired the elements you would have naturally had if you had played the game well.

In other words you are either very good at this and you clear the situation effortessly, you play the game as intended and thinker with your tools until you clear the situation, or you suck and are punished because of it, as it should be. There's much less randomness and chance, so it's not realistic to just try it once and again until you get a good roll. Either you can solve the situation or you can't. If you can't, either you can improvise a way to do so with what you have in store or you can't. If you can't you failed at the game, and so you are punished.

I think we can both agree that games are for entertaining, correct? And a challenge can be entertaining, but so can experience or stories or the artistic merits of a game and I hope you're big enough not to say otherwise just because you feel threatened that some of the games you like are reviled by some here.

I never said otherwise, and I actually have discused games like Pathologic and Cosmology of Kyoto elsewhere. Or visual novels, a genre that's actually one hundred percent storyfagotry. Or otome dating sims, man, which means I'm not precisely elitist about my gaming, which i consider gaming and nothing else. The problem is people getting elitist about the games they like when those aren't even challenging: If you are going to get elitist about games, which is retarded to begin with, at least get elitist about games almost no one can do a one credit clear of, which means you actually belong to an elite when you can clear them, and not about games everyone and her aunt, her mom, her retarded inbred cousing, her dog, her ferret, and her little mouse can make a clear of without breaking a sweat.

In other words I never said: Hey, i'm super pro elite gamer nya, you suck, LOL (nya!). They do, and then it comes to happen the only arguments they have to do so are that their favorite games have a story and atmosphere, not that the games they like are the kind of autistic crap you need to be truly elite to clear. And then they start criticizing art styles because, honestly, that's the only thing the games they like are about.

In the end, the thread isn't called western storyfag RPGs have less gameplay than minesweeper on easy mode, is it?

 

[hanssolo]

lol wtf is this bull shit star trek fucking shit some fucking farmers whore riding around on her fucking space bike lol gaurdia wow so original fucking wrpg fags I bet they all have swords in space inconsistent setting immersion rui ned lololololololololololololololololol

LOOSK LIKE KILLING GOD AGAINN LOL

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLO!

 

[DefJam101]

olololollolololol

 

[Archibald]

Also, lets not forget that in M&M you could equip your high fantasy heroes with fucking blasters.

 

[Black Cat]

Also, lets not forget that in M&M you could equip your high fantasy heroes with fucking blasters.

But you have to understand, man. Western gaming grew up. Now it is about mature storytelling, not about clearing insane dungeons, solving insane puzzles, and fighting insane bosses in crazy, LOLtastic settings.

Grow up, man. Playing games is serious business.

 

[FeelTheRads]

I'm sorry, it's you weaboos that tried to say JRPGs can totally be taken seriously, and now you flip-flop and say that it doesn't matter.

 

[Archibald]

Probably weaboos are responsible for global warming too.

 

[Black Cat]

I'm sorry, it's you weaboos that tried to say JRPGs can totally be taken seriously, and now you flip-flop and say that it doesn't matter.

When did I say JRPGs could be taken seriously? Every single time i have talked about them I have said the settings are ridiculous and LOLtastic. All my arguments have been always from the side of gameplay, which should be obvious since I have spent half my LPs of Shin Megami Tensei games making fun of the plot and criticizing the influences they got wrong.

 

[Zomg]

If you guys went and played some JRPGs instead of trying to hate them in the abstract and/or based on screenshots you could actually get some hits on BC, because they're usually aggressively boring and insipid purely in terms of gameplay, aside from their aesthetics and settings.

 

[SCO]

Well i can try. I don't love the jrpg formula, i'm just obsessive compulsive - so i'm instead going to talk about a reactive game, plot-wise.
Der Langrisser is a simple strategy jrpg - very simple, like scissors stone paper simple - a apparently linear affair mostly, but there are some things worthwhile about it.

First the bad: setting is as boring as possible: you are the chosen one, ruthless empire on the rise, ancient evil awakening etc.
Art direction is also typical, spikey hairdo, pedophile-bait costumes (fortunately only noticeable in concept art) etc:

Combat is too easy. I confess i gamed the system: experience is divided among a commander and it's troops (don't have troops, get it all). Also if the commander dies all the other troops die too (useful if you have a timed objective, but you lose the experience, so i didn't) - it didn't actually make much difference i think. Instead of using the ultimate classes only on the last level, i used them 3 levels before, big fucking deal (one of the reason spell casters can become powerhouses late game is that they have area effect spells that tend to kill things that can die at the same time).

Level scheme: very basic: you don't change attributes on level up, but every nine levels, you change to a different class. Knight, gryphon rider, etc, etc. Each character has a different class hierarchy, and there is a choice on each level up, so it doesn't all go to the same place (there are secret classes if you follow the path the game likes for the character).

The good:
You can choose your side from all 3 sides possible in the game or fuck them all up the ass. The possible sides are: imperial, light goddess worshipers, dark pansy worshipers.
The progression doesn't feel artificial, simply because it happens as a direct result of actions in-level, not as a yes/no dialog (mostly - i recall one where you had to decide to betray or not)
Moreover the scenarios have a little variation if the some scripted deaths or events happen, your team, scenarios and ending in a playthrough are different. One way to incline this further would be to take a page from fire emblem and crawlers and have perma-death (don't see why not - the dialog is all in level and simply doesn't happen if the character is already eliminated).
The scenario chart really drives this home (it's a spoiler if you really care):

http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/9652/derlangrisserscenario.png

It's the one thing from japan where i felt that the flow of the game was controlled by me.

 

[Achilles]

All my arguments have been always from the side of gameplay, which should be obvious since I have spent half my LPs of Shin Megami Tensei games making fun of the plot and criticizing the influences they got wrong.

But is it right to cut out every other part of the game and talk exclusively about gameplay mechanics? It is my opinion that every part of a game counts towards judging it's overall quality, although with some things being more important than others.

If you guys went and played some JRPGs instead of trying to hate them in the abstract and/or based on screenshots you could actually get some hits on BC, because they're usually aggressively boring and insipid purely in terms of gameplay, aside from their aesthetics and settings.

Well this is the problem really, I lack the will to torture myself like that in order to "win" a thread. It seems I'm still a low-level internet warrior . Anyway, for me the point of this thread was not to score hits against another poster but to get a decent discussion going, as far away from the usual "faggot - no u!" as possible. While we did get a fair share of that, there were a number of posters that contributed with interesting, well-written and thought-provoking posts.

 

[La Concha de tu Madre­]

Los juegos japoneses son una mierda.

 

[Phelot]

You can play the battle i said on Devil Survivor, for example, all the times you want and, if you don't really understand the way the game works really well and think about a way to use such understanding to defeat all those unfair jerks assaulting you, you are going to get the same result no matter what you do. On those games i have mentioned the tactics in battle are just an extention of the, say, strategy outside of it: What demons do you have? What skills have you been inheriting? What skills have your characters been decrypting and learning? Etc, etc, etc.

When you hit a boss fight or a set piece battle it isn't about trying, failing, then trying again, and wining. There are three possible outcomes: You have a party that can steamroll the battle, which is the less common one, or either you have not such a party but have been playing in such a way you have a variety of options at your disposal, so then you start thinking about what tools you have and how you can use them to clear the situation, or you have been ignoring entire parts of the game system and thus you must grind until you are strong enough to brute force your way through the situation or until you have acquired the elements you would have naturally had if you had played the game well.

In other words you are either very good at this and you clear the situation effortessly, you play the game as intended and thinker with your tools until you clear the situation, or you suck and are punished because of it, as it should be. There's much less randomness and chance, so it's not realistic to just try it once and again until you get a good roll. Either you can solve the situation or you can't. If you can't, either you can improvise a way to do so with what you have in store or you can't. If you can't you failed at the game, and so you are punished.

I admit I'm lame for doing so, but I had a glance at a walkthrough for that game and while it's very complicated, it still seems to boil down to some very simple mechanics: Monster A can't be harmed by fire. Use Ice damage. Monster B kills in one turn. Use a silencing spell to prevent it... It's like math equations having one answer. For this monster, I use this, rather then trying to say, lure it into a trap, divide and conquer, flanking, retreating...

So in a sense the game is a board game... which as I said is fine, but to be honest I don't think it's fair to try and compare it to most western games that aren't trying to be super challenging. TBH, it would probably be better to compare it to western wargames, which I'd say are much more tactical, but that's just my opinion.

Right now, I was reminded of Disciples 1&2 which were cool games except their combat was incredibly boring because it ended up being non-stop grinding battles except they lacked a very complicated damage type/resist type system as seen in Devil Survivor.

And as I admitted in the other thread, my main gripe about jRPGs IS their style. Maybe that makes me shallow, I don't care, but to me these style of games are horrible. It'd be like playing a game with a constant high pitched ringing going on and being told it's just the setting.

I never said otherwise, and I actually have discused games like Pathologic and Cosmology of Kyoto elsewhere. Or visual novels, a genre that's actually one hundred percent storyfagotry. Or otome dating sims, man, which means I'm not precisely elitist about my gaming, which i consider gaming and nothing else. The problem is people getting elitist about the games they like when those aren't even challenging: If you are going to get elitist about games, which is retarded to begin with, at least get elitist about games almost no one can do a one credit clear of

You start off claiming you're not an elitist and that you DO like games that aren't necessarily challenging, but then you look down on those that are "elitist" about games that aren't... challenging? Who here has even claimed that PST or Fallout are even challenging? TBH, I haven't searched this whole thread... but I don't recall anyone claiming otherwise.

 

[Phelot]

The progression doesn't feel artificial, simply because it happens as a direct result of actions in-level, not as a yes/no dialog

THIS is something I want more of in games and is something that games like The Witcher are fucking awful at despite their claims of deep C&C. I love games that allow me to make enemies by my own actions, by stealing from them, by killing them, or even by simply being buddies with THEIR enemies. Not by a simple cutscene and a "DO THIS OR DO THAT?" choice.