Interview Lionheart Team Q&A #16 @ RPGVault

[Volourn]

:shock:

 

[Astromarine]

Someone Valium the poor demented soul

 

[Vault Dweller]

Lol, I believe I'm beginning to like you, Skorpios.

I was a beta-tester on Arcanum for example

Uhh, When you were a beta tester did you notice by any chance that ranged combat was fucked up? Sorry, could not resist

I'm tempted to say that my actions ARE just words on a discussion board,

Somehow I knew you would be

But it is a part of a gameplay. So far the spell list is the most boring feature of the game as it offers no mystery, no discovery, and no sense of wonder when you cast a spell. Somebody fucked up, and there is no reason to pretend it's no big deal.....
.....We like it too, although it would not have hurt to have more originality in the magic department, but I'm sure we can save the really cool magic for Lionheart 2: The Mother of All Sequels

Where are the strength of your convictions, Vault Dweller? You had a game designer in the palm of your hand and yet you didn't ask him 'who fucked up'?? Suddenly the magic listing isn't a big deal any more? It can wait until the sequel? What happened to the urgency of your earlier criticisms??

It's actually quite simple. I think that the spell list does not reflect overall strength of the game and that somebody fucked up. I honestly don't care who fucked up and it's not my place to question Eric about it. He heard my opinion and opinions of the other members, it's his business to act on it or ignore it. Like I said before, I respect Eric for coming here and posting his opinion in the middle of a negative thread. He can read, so there is no reason to repeat in a direct response what's been written before. That's where I stand.

When I said "we like it too", it was in reference to the magic system in general, not the spells. To give you an analogy, I like the dialogue system but I think that the icons are stupid.
As for the sequel, I never said "can't wait for the sequel". I realize that at this point it's hardly possible to change or add anything, so any changes could be implemented only in future titles including a potential and very possible sequel.

Let me get this straight: the dialogue icons are purely designed for "extremely slow people...who think reading is boring". If that is true, how do they impact on you at all? You obviously don't need them, so again, how do they affect you? Does the existence of a wheelchair ramp make it impossible for you to walk into a building?

And here we go again...My gripe is with the quest icons as they show which line leads to a quest and which line leads to some background info. Personally I enjoy to strike a conversation with a NPC and find a quest when you least expect. It's like a reward of a kind. The icon system, in my understanding, takes it away as it shows right away where each line leads to. Yes, I will still ask all the other questions, but the element of surprise would be gone. Here is another analogy. Before you start a game, a brief plot overview is displayed showing you who's who and behind what. You are still going to play a game but it won't be the same, now would it?
If, however, I can turn them off I would have no problems whatsover

so following your logic the majority of all people are morons

Pretty much. Look around. You disagree? Hmm, Australia must be a very different place then.

"Someone fucked up", "Reflexive is trying to attract...morons", "People who think reading is boring = morons".
Carefully thought out? Maybe, if you are deliberately trying to be offensive, but I think you'll agree the presentation is far from positive

I am not trying to be offensive, I simply state what I think. So tell me why do you think Reflexive introduced the icons? Do you really believe that it was done to help those who are having a hard time to comprehend a written word? No, it was done to help fans of action oriented gameplay mindlessly click on icon-corresponding dialogue lines to "get to the point" likely without reading anything but quests descriptions. I would call such a person a moron. That's my opinion and I'm sticking with it.

A significant portion of the population are illiterate or suffer from learning disabilities, they don't enjoy reading much - do they automatically qualify as morons under your categorisation scheme?

Ok, they can't read, but you CAN, I wrote "people who think that reading is boring", not people who can't or unable to read.

Skorp, I agree with you that the moron indicators aren't life or death, but you lose the argument on a Godwin's law ruling

Noooooo! I was so close to winning!!!!! Common, Astro, he did not mention the Nazis, he mentioned the Mein Kampf and some vague political groups. It does not count. It feels like cheating

 

[chrisbeddoes]

Well this thread has no point .

It did not have a point from the start but it was entertaining anyway.


Lionheart seems like a good game and I will go and buy it unless I hear that it is full of bugs or something like that in the first reviews.

As for the moron indicators

never forget that morons are customers too and that customers pay the developers bills.

Finally is that board RPG Codex becoming too elitist ?



I mean yes we all find the icons a big insult to our intelligence .

Is the fact that we all find the icons a big insult to our intelligence an indicator that these message boards are becoming too elitist ?

Because normal games would not be concerned from those indicators .

They would just ignore them.

 

[Jed]

Finally is that board RPG Codex becoming too elitist ?

He's a witch! Burn him!

 

[chrisbeddoes]

Just edited the game files to make me immune to fire.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Well this thread has no point .

Some may argue that all things are pointless, and it's people who assign the points and then fight to death over them.

It did not have a point from the start but it was entertaining anyway.

For isn't entertainment a point in itself too?

Finally is that board RPG Codex becoming too elitist ?

You have a gift, brother Chris, for stating the obvious

I mean yes we all find the icons a big insult to our intelligence .

My main concern is that they spoil conversations by giving away quests.

 

[chrisbeddoes]

My main concern is that they spoil conversations by giving away quests.

Ahh .
You mean like big talking heads in a game that i cannot remember it's name right now ?



Chris "RUNS AWAY LIKE HELL" TM

 

[Astromarine]

touche

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Oh no, we're not finished yet.

As before, I'm asking you to answer a single very simple question. Do you think that a person, who is mentally able to play Lionheart and progress through the game, would be able to figure out what each question leads to without any mental efforts and a degree in English Literature? Yes or No?

Haven't all of you already defeated your own arguments? If the 'proper' player is intelligent enough to deduce what a given dialogue option will do, haven't they already 'spoiled' themselves? What difference does the presence of an icon make?

It's knowledge. Knowledged gained from what, use of a skill? No, not in this case. Use of your own mind? No. You're being told it leads to something. 9 times out of 10, most players are after the quest when talking to an NPC. It's rare (unless you're playing that way) to want to kill someone, and if I don't want to kill someone, I know what option to avoid.

From your screenshot, I know precisely what to say and what not to say. Let's say that instead of the sword icon next to the "If you are a witch, then you must be destroyed" line, there was a quest icon, because, when you threaten to kill her, she quickly offers you a quest so that she can live...

Changes things doesn't it? So let's say I'm after quests. I talk to her and lo and behold, there's a quest icon next to that line. A line that normally, I wouldn't say for fear of what might happen. I can now say that line knowing full well that I'll get a quest. It takes the fun out of discovering these things for yourself. Instead of finding out quests from exploration and asking questions in dialogue, I know what to ask and know when someone has a quest and when someone doesn't. More to the point, I know exactly what to say to get the quest.

So instead of role-playing my character to be the good guy, I can talk to everyone I want and just click on the quest icon marked items without fear.

The best part is what Cabal says:

*Sigh* I've explained this before, but the combat icon indicates a hostile tone. It doesn't always lead to combat. It is there to help players understand what they're about to say and how they're going to say it. While most of the time it's fairly obvious that you're being threatening or insulting, other times it's not. Some NPCs react positively to hostile remarks, but the bulk of them will usually react in kind.

Fantastic huh? I encounter a situation where the combat icon is next to what I feel is a fairly harmless line, a line of dialogue that I'd normally say. I go to click on the line and wait, there's a combat icon there... Changes things, doesn't it? Instead of clicking on it and finding out, I somehow psychically know that she won't take too kindly to my remark.

So do I click on it? Knowing what will happen?

As for the unmarked options they do look interesting enough to follow on their own and how do you KNOW Vault Dweller that they lead to dead ends?

... because they're not marked with icons.

Why waste two dialogue threads on dead ends when the quest thread is clearly marked - wouldn't it mean there IS content on those two extra threads, perhaps leading to whole new quests and information?

No, not quests, remember, no quest icon.

But in Lionheart they have expanded what a 'barter related situation' is from the Fallout Games. No longer restricted solely to the barter screen, it is now checked against in dialogue when you perhaps try something like negotiate more reward money, or convince an NPC to give you a quest item instead of some other reward. If you try something and fail, at least you know that building up your barter skill is what is required next time, just the same as when you try and pick a lock you KNOW that you are using your lockpick skill.

Being informed of the skill that will be used with an option I don't mind so much. Especially the times when you *think* a skill should be used and it's actually another skill they're testing. But being told where a quest is, what I should say if I want to make someone hostile etc... takes the exploration out of dialogue.

But of the rest how do ANY of them seriously impact on your enjoyment of the game? Aren't you over-reacting to a very minor interface issue? My 'only good point' according to you is that good writing makes dialogues - my complementary point is that icons like these don't automatically make BAD dialogues so what are you complaining about?

Imagine being told at the start of Fallout that the water chip was in Necropolis. How much does that ruin the exploration in the game? With your own argument, surely knowing where the water chip is, is going to help me roleplay my character better, right?

Better yet, imagine an interface feature on the world map that had a big red X with the words "WATER CHIP IS HERE" on it.

Tell me how that's a good thing.

So how do the icons make that fact suddenly evil? Don't the icons HELP you roleplay? Do you want your character to act more aggressively? The choice is yours. Aren't quests IMPORTANT in CRPGs, so the interface alerts you to them.

As opposed to discovering them for yourself through your own dialogue exploration? How is that fun, exactly? To me, the option ruins one of the fun aspects of dialogue. When I talk to someone, I don't know what's going to happen. If I knew what was going to happen, I wouldn't choose half the options I choose. Yes, it gets me what I want quickly, but it takes the fun out of the process.

 

[Astromarine]

It sounds to me like you're confusing the issue. You're looking at it wrong. AFAIK, the icons don't tell you what the reaction to the words is going to be, it tells you what *you* are trying to accomplish. A combat icon does NOT mean that you will be attacked for saying it, it simply means you are saying something aggressive. A quest icon does NOT mean you will get a quest for saying a line, it means that line is being said because of a quest you're *already in*. WHY THE HELL would they make it like you are saying? The skill icons mean you are attempting something, so in my mind at least the other buttons mean the same thing. In one case you are attempting to be insulting, and in the other you are attempting to advance a quest. This has always been how I read it. How the hell did you people get to the conclusion that the buttons meant what is coming *after*??? I pretty much guarantee that in those unmarked lines, somewhere further down the tree, is the possibility of getting quests. Come on, people, make some sense please.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

AFAIK, the icons don't tell you what the reaction to the words is going to be, it tells you what *you* are trying to accomplish. A combat icon does NOT mean that you will be attacked for saying it, it simply means you are saying something aggressive. A quest icon does NOT mean you will get a quest for saying a line, it means that line is being said because of a quest you're *already in*.

MORON INDICATORS!! For the people who just don't realise that saying "You have to be destroyed witch!" is an aggressive thing to say.

How the hell did you people get to the conclusion that the buttons meant what is coming *after*???

We also flag responses that will lead to quest discussions i.e. "Tell me about your strange dilmena" with quest icons.

The quest icon is there to inform you that by taking this route, you will be accepting a quest**. It's a way of informing you that your quest log is about to update.

(**I usually find I'm accepting a quest when I say "Yes, I will accept your quest.")

it's the truth - we included it to reach beyond the hard core audience.

Yup, moron indicators.

 

[Skorpios]

No, it was done to help fans of action oriented gameplay mindlessly click on icon-corresponding dialogue lines to "get to the point" likely without reading anything but quests descriptions.

And how does this affect YOUR gameplay? Both you and DarkUnderlord return to the point that with the indicators in place you would make different decisions. So? If you were playing a different game with dialogue, wouldn't you make different decisions? The basic point is that you are STILL making decisions - still thinking about the path your character is taking in the game. Does that sound more like roleplaying or mindless hack and slash? If you are more aware of quests than without the icons, are you saying you DON'T play RPGs for the quests and adventures they lead your character on, and the rewards they bestow?

Plus, Vault Dweller, you said several times that the icons DON'T broaden Lionheart's appeal, yet in the above quote you seem to indicate that the icons accommodate people who want dialogues to "get to the point" with the minimum of reading. Seeing as that isn't the description of the average RPGer doesn't that mean the Lionheart has broader appeal than a 'pure' RPG?? (Whatever the term 'pure RPG' means of course.)

Is it such a horrendous thing that 'fans of action' come to Lionheart and perhaps start reading a little more than the question descriptions? Perhaps discovering the challenges awaiting them in the use of skills such as Speech, Sneak or Barter? Learning that the Way of the Sword (or the Rocket-Propelled Grenade) isn't the only way to play games? Don't you WANT Reflexive to sell lots of copies of Lionheart so they are given a bigger budget, for an even better sequel?

Why this rabid revulsion about any feature that might help that happen? Especially a feature that has such little effect on the overall quality of the game! So you make different decisions based on Lionheart's system. If they hadn't implemented Saint's Speech skill, and stuck with Schmooze and Outwit, wouldn't you be playing differently again? Points you CAN'T deny - Lionheart still looks to have a robust, interesting dialogue system with plenty of surprises and secrets to explore - you admit yourself that you like the look of it.

The icon system exists - suddenly Lionheart is a totally different game to you. For me, the difference between my idea of an iconless version and what we have now is less pronounced so I'm not fussed. What you have to come to terms with is whether Lionheart is a good enough game to play as it stands NOW. Yes or no?

If no, no need to call the rest of us morons if we decide to go on to play the game and have some fun. Also no need to demand that Reflexive sabotage a feature they have obviously put a lot of work into. For we've already seen that these icons are MORE than just moron indicators - they also improve the functionality of several non-combat skills.

It's a bit like me demanding they remove the Speech skill because I had an argument with Saint, and I can't stand playing any game that he had any input into isn't it??? (Obviously, I DON'T feel that way or ever have - just making a point.)

DarkUnderlord, your argument is on shaky ground if you are basing your whole criticism of Lionheart's dialogue system and how it works on one single screenshot. I'm sure I could dig up a screenshot showing a less than stellar dialogue from PS:T, Fallout, Baldur's Gate etc, etc.

(**I usually find I'm accepting a quest when I say "Yes, I will accept your quest.")

Yes, and in Arcanum your Journal Icon lights up as well! Is that another moron indicator? I'll be sure to pass your criticism on to Tim Cain. All sorts of games use various interface icons, sound effects and other devices to inform players of 'important' events such as quests in RPGs. Lionheart's icons seem to be a logical step - away from hardcore RPG doctrine perhaps - but not totally unforgivable surely?

Changes things doesn't it? So let's say I'm after quests. I talk to her and lo and behold, there's a quest icon next to that line. A line that normally, I wouldn't say for fear of what might happen. I can now say that line knowing full well that I'll get a quest. It takes the fun out of discovering these things for yourself

Your example is hypothetical so difficult to deny - whether such a choice exists in Lionheart we won't know for a while yet so forgive me if I answer you with an alternative hypothesis based on the above situation.

You select the 'tough' option and yes, the Weird Woman caves in and gives you a quest. But this choice has consequences - she refuses to help you with the Nostradamus quest mentioned earlier and you also find yourself a target of the town guards, who just happen to be led by her brother. (Further threats just make her call the guards to the scene and they attack you immediately.)

Now I came up with that off the top of my head, I'm sure an experienced RPG designer could do even better with some work. Does that scenario sound like a mindless hack and slash? Your focus on 'quest and more quests' has consequences in the game - as does your reliance on 'tough talk'. You are roleplaying a ruthless kind of character because you are following the quests above all else (which is what a ruthless, power-hungry character would do). The wonderful thing about Lionheart is you can also roleplay any other kind of character, just give the dialogue options (AND their icons) different priorities. This sounds like a fairly good roleplaying system to me - is it just my imagination?

Even if you are a 'mindless action fan' the icon system can actually TEACH you about roleplaying. What is the core of a good RPG? That choices have consequences! People who mindlessly click icons might learn that lesson very quickly if Reflexive have done their jobs right - isn't that a wonderful thing rather than a terrible thing?

Remember, icons or no icons - the dialogue system will only be as good as the writing that makes it up. I think I've shown that any basically competent writer can devise scenarios that USE the icons to give even more roleplaying opportunities rather than less.

Of course all of this is guesswork, and will only be proven once someone actually plays the game. Personally, I'm looking forward to it, icons and all.

Oh, Astromarine, I hope I'm not in violation of Godwin's Law - but seeing as several other posters believe this thread is viable, I have decided to contribute.

 

[Astromarine]

oh sure, further replies by the winning party renew the discussion. if the law didn't allow that to happen the people who propose it would be just like the nazis...

whoops.

 

[Skorpios]

Link for those who have NO IDEA what we are talking about

Like me, several posts back.

 

[Azael]

Yes, and in Arcanum your Journal Icon lights up as well! Is that another moron indicator? I'll be sure to pass your criticism on to Tim Cain. All sorts of games use various interface icons, sound effects and other devices to inform players of 'important' events such as quests in RPGs. Lionheart's icons seem to be a logical step - away from hardcore RPG doctrine perhaps - but not totally unforgivable surely?

Bad example. In Arcanum the journal icon flashes whenever anything new is entered into the journal, not just quests, plus it's always after the fact.

I'm not trying to act like a skipping record, but my beef with these indicators is that most of the time they aren't needed, since dialogue tends to be fairly straight forward in most CRPGs and if they are used in more vague cases, they'll ruin the surprise.

 

[Voss]

I feel obligated to wander into the discussion, now that RL things that were pursuing me have been dealt with. Ah, the things that happen on the boared when I'm busy.

I'm vaguely tempted to wait since the one screenshot with the indicators isn't entirely informative.
But, on the other hand, I find the entire concept of the indicators disturbing, just on a social level- there are too many people who can't read anyway to actively encourage them not to. Plus, I agree with the concept that it takes away a lot of the surprise of the dialogue. Its like having a maze already mapped out for you, or a crossword puzzle thats already filled in. Sure some mystery might still be in the dialogue tree if you click one of the non-tagged options, but then again, it might be generic flavor text that displays and then loops you back to the main choices again, and that is worrying.

Plus the icons aren't aligned properly with the text, and thats just driving me nuts!

As for the weirdness about interface icons being potential similar...please. You act through the interface icon. If there was a second button next to each interface icon explaining that if you click the sword, it allows you to attack a character in melee combat, then that would be similar and equally a moron indicator.
Redundancy can be bad. Like having a car with two gas peddles right next to each other. There isn't any point.

And since Cabal states in that thread that it isn't toggleable... :evil:
and he also says:

The quest icon is there to inform you that by taking this route, you will be accepting a quest. It's a way of informing you that your quest log is about to update

:shock:
So no mystery at all. Lovely.

 

[Astromarine]

OK, non-toggleable + quest spoilers are MAJOR fuckups. That changes things quite a lot.

 

[Vault Dweller]

OK, non-toggleable + quest spoilers are MAJOR fuckups. That changes things quite a lot.

Of course, they are quest spoilers, what did you think they were for? DarkUnderlord had a great example:

Let's say that instead of the sword icon next to the "If you are a witch, then you must be destroyed" line, there was a quest icon, because, when you threaten to kill her, she quickly offers you a quest so that she can live... Changes things doesn't it?

'nuff said

 

[Voss]

Yes, well, I had some initial hope because of the limited info on the screenshot. But Cabal confirmed it, so...


And I really can't think of even a semi-plausible way to work it into the game's context.
In addition to having a bound spirit that occasionally talks to you, you also have the uncanny ability to forsee when someone will give you a job.
I guess it would make interviews a breeze.

 

[Vault Dweller]

If you are more aware of quests than without the icons, are you saying you DON'T play RPGs for the quests and adventures they lead your character on, and the rewards they bestow?

Finding, discovering, and stumbling upon quests is an important part of playing a RPG, at least for me. Taking it to the extreme, would you like to start a complex game like Arcanum for example and have all the quests appear in your journal?

Plus, Vault Dweller, you said several times that the icons DON'T broaden Lionheart's appeal, yet in the above quote you seem to indicate that the icons accommodate people who want dialogues to "get to the point" with the minimum of reading.

In my arrogance, I don't consider attracting people who would play Lionheart like Diablo2 broadening Lionheart's appeal. It's like attracting people to chess to play it like bowling: line up figures and roll a ball.

Is it such a horrendous thing that 'fans of action' come to Lionheart and perhaps start reading a little more than the question descriptions?

Before the icons they would have been forced to read and may be start appreciating the beauty of the genre, but now? I don't think so. Read what that moron wrote again "is it possible to make a menu option you can tick like "simple conversations" and it cuts out all the crap you dont need to know? that would be much easier for some of us". If you think that he's one of a kind, you are mistaken. Optimism is a good thing, being blinded by wishful thinking is not.

Perhaps discovering the challenges awaiting them in the use of skills such as Speech, Sneak or Barter? Learning that the Way of the Sword (or the Rocket-Propelled Grenade) isn't the only way to play games?

Let me quote again: "cut out all the crap you dont need to know".

Don't you WANT Reflexive to sell lots of copies of Lionheart so they are given a bigger budget, for an even better sequel?

I want, I really do. But dumbing the game down isn't a solution. It can only ensure negative press and reaction, and help bury the game.

Especially a feature that has such little effect on the overall quality of the game! So you make different decisions based on Lionheart's system.

Little effect? Different decisions? It completely changes the way you'd play the game, and it takes away all decisions because nobody would turn down a quest that could have been missed otherwise.

If they hadn't implemented Saint's Speech skill, and stuck with Schmooze and Outwit, wouldn't you be playing differently again?

It would be simplier, that's true, but there is difference between simple and dumb.

Lionheart still looks to have a robust, interesting dialogue system with plenty of surprises and secrets to explore - you admit yourself that you like the look of it.

I like the dialogue system and all the soft skills affecting it, but quest-wise there would be surprises and secrets left if the icons are there.

What you have to come to terms with is whether Lionheart is a good enough game to play as it stands NOW. Yes or no?

I honestly don't know NOW. The point that I'm trying to make is that it IS a big deal for many of us. May be you don't care, that's fine, but we do, and the damn icons stand to ruin the game for us just because we care so much about discovering quests on our own and making uninfluenced choices in dialogues.

If no, no need to call the rest of us morons if we decide to go on to play the game and have some fun.

The icons are for morons, you agreed with me that a person who is mentally able to play the game, would be able to figure out dialogue lines without help.

Also no need to demand that Reflexive sabotage a feature they have obviously put a lot of work into.

A lot of work? It's a simple tag. And nobody's demanding to sabotage this so-called feature, we simple ask for an option to turn it off and we explained why. Do you find it unreasonable?

For we've already seen that these icons are MORE than just moron indicators - they also improve the functionality of several non-combat skills.

Improve the functionality? It merely indicates that you are using a skill, it improves nothing and it does not affect functionality in any way.

It's a bit like me demanding they remove the Speech skill because..

You know, you really suck at making analogies. You can not compare a skill that allows you to do something AND that you can skip if you don't like what it does to a passive indicator that spoil gameplay for you regardless whether you like it or not.
For example, in Fallout there was Awareness perk that gives you very detailed information about enemies, allowing you to target the most dangerous one first, and to see hitpoints remaining, allowing you to take otherwise unnecessary risk and keep attacking if you know that there is only several hp left instead of healing yourself. A friend of mine thought its spoiling the combat, so he never took the perk. Choices are good.

DarkUnderlord, your argument is on shaky ground if you are basing your whole criticism of Lionheart's dialogue system and how it works on one single screenshot. I'm sure I could dig up a screenshot showing a less than stellar dialogue from PS:T, Fallout, Baldur's Gate etc, etc.

And what would be your point?

Yes, and in Arcanum your Journal Icon lights up as well! Is that another moron indicator?

Once again, there is a difference between an indicator that let you know that something happened and an indicator that tells you what will happen.

 

[Skorpios]

OK, maybe I suck at making analogies - but maybe you also suck at considering any point of view that differs from yours.

You don't like the icons and want them removed. The 'moron' you keep quoting doesn't like dialogues and wants them dumbed down. Can you see any sort of similarity between those positions? Why is your position so reasonable and his so stupid? For whatever reason you believe (broadening appeal vs. dumbing down) Reflexive have included BOTH features - the icons AND complex dialogues. Why should your desires be met and not the moron's? Perhaps Reflexive should remove the icons AND simplify the dialogue - wouldn't that make everyone happy?

Point - the icons ARE more than simple tags - I think I've made the point fairly well that they DO improve the functionality of the Barter skill for example because you can see that skill at work - thus making the skill more useful - especially to players who might otherwise ignore passive skills (fans of action for example). I assume the dialogue and the icons were used together to design dialogue threads - removing the icons will not be as simple as you seem to suggest. Wouldn't turning them off seriously impact on the enjoyment of a character that has tagged Speech and Barter for example? They'd barely see their skills in action at all.

I notice you didn't comment at all on my alternate example of what gameplay could be like WITH icons. Did my example sound like fun or not? Wouldn't losing the Nostradamus quest be a surprise? Wouldn't the sudden aggression of the town guards be an interesting discovery? Is the game entertaining you or not? Even with icons.

In a good game choices have consequences that draw you into the story or help you roleplay. Icons in no way interfere with that process - although they MIGHT alter the way you consider those choices, I'll give you that. The consequences of your choices still exist. If anything, the icons increase the factors you have to consider when making choices (if you want to play the game that way) making you think MORE.

Some of you may have noticed that I've gone to the horse's mouth regarding just how spoilerish the quest icons are on the Interplay board. At least then our argument won't be based on assumptions.

Vault Dweller 'before the icons they would have been FORCED to read'? This is a game - how many people actually play games that FORCE them to do things they don't want to? You just said that you hate how the icons FORCE your decisions into narrow paths (always going for the quests etc). Maybe some people don't like to be FORCED to read so much. Is that so evil? My point is and always has been, that if the icons make the game slightly more attractive to those kinds of people they might buy it when they otherwise would NOT and if their natural curiosity leads them to read won't they learn more about RPGs and even get into it?

If they have NO natural curiosity, then why do they play games? Even the desire to get the next level of Doom shows some basic curiosity surely?

Look at Lionheart's story for a second. You are going to meet people like Cortes, da Vinci, Torquemada, Galileo for goodness sake!!!! Wouldn't that tempt to you read even a couple of the dialogues - icons notwithstanding?

You have a very strange idea of game design if you think they should include features that FORCE players to do anything....it's just a game to have fun with - I don't wan't to be FORCED to do anything thanks very much!

 

[chrisbeddoes]

This thread is being sponsored by Bayer TM makers of aspirin TM
Aspirin : the most effective way to cure your headache.

 

[Vault Dweller]

This thread is being sponsored by Bayer TM makers of aspirin TM
Aspirin : the most effective way to cure your headache.

lol, way to go, Chris

 

[Skorpios]

I apologise if my long posts are giving you guys a headache - sorry I'm FORCING YOU TO READ SO MUCH!

Maybe I'll just replace my points with some nice 'moron indicators' just for you.

DarkUnderlord doesn't like icons:

Vault Dweller wants surprises: :shock:

There, is that better?

:wink:

Disclaimer: This post is meant to convey sarcasm(TM) - try it, it's fun!