The most elegant proof that FO3 is a better RPG than FO1

[Joe Krow]

And maybe RPGs should also include a realistic shitting and pissing cycle for characters. When you play a game, do you imagine your characters have magic bowels that teleport all the shit and piss to the moon?

Actually my character's been holding it in for six months. He can never find a bathroom.

 

[1eyedking]

I meant great work.

Yes, but it doesn't fit the syntax. Magna opera is the plural form of magnum opus; otherwise your sentence doesn't make any sense.

And with it being 2007AD, I get to be as dang flexible as I want with da verbiage, even incorporating some anarchistic ivonic fragments, if need be, I might add, and I shall.

Because it somehow makes you irradiate more intelligence? A veritable faux pas (in the french literal sense). Just quit trying so fucking hard.

 

[Jasede]

...irradiate?

 

[Mr Happy]

That isnt roleplaying, retard. Thats LARPing, which a lot of us dont enjoy. Im sorry, but I dont play games to enjoy "turning around". If thats your idea of fun, then fine, all the best to you. But if you expect everyone else to conform to your distorted idea of having fun (turning around? seriously?), then you must be fucking stupid.

But in this case we are not talking about "pretend" roleplaying, we are talking about a valid limitation. The first person line of sight is a restriction on the player imposed by the character's abilities. In my opinion that is the most valid sort... dumb characters can't cast spells, weaklings can't wear full plate armor, non-cartographers can't map, and beings with two eyes in the front of their head cannot see 20 feet in all directions at the same time. A good rpg allows the character to dictate the player's options. Whether you prefer it or not, I'm sure you agree that the first person perspective is limiting the players abilities to more accurately conform to his character's. How is that pretend? When you play an isometric game do you imagine your character has some innate wizard eye spell that allows him to see everything in a 20 foot radius at the same time? That's pretend. Isometric view and a quest compass and you're good to go. I'm surprised Oblivion didn't include it.

God damnit, I already explained why this is not a valid argument against isometric view and for first person perspective. Jeez.

 

[Joe Krow]

God damnit, I already explained why this is not a valid argument against isometric view and for first person perspective. Jeez.

What are you on? Has that perspective ever even been used in an rpg? I don't consider it a viable alternative and apparently neither does anyone else (thus it has gone unused). Honestly, if it had been used even once in an rpg you might have a point... When the actual first person perspective is possible why settle for a wonky simulation of it?

 

[DraQ]

...irradiate?

Yeah, Keldorn often seems quite radiant if you think about it.

"I saw a 3d RPG the other day."
"Horrible creatures, I avoid them whenever I can."

 

[Keldorn]

I meant great work.

Yes, but it doesn't fit the syntax. Magna opera is the plural form of magnum opus; otherwise your sentence doesn't make any sense.

And with it being 2007AD, I get to be as dang flexible as I want with da verbiage, even incorporating some anarchistic ivonic fragments, if need be, I might add, and I shall.

Because it somehow makes you irradiate more intelligence? A veritable faux pas (in the french literal sense). Just quit trying so fucking hard.

Oooh, another hyper-sensitive, stylistic constrictoid, demanding conformity to his personal expressive preferences. I don't try at all, I just ad lib. It's silly, wild, wacky, frolicky, and very fun if you get into it. Your only hope is to repress and ignore me, or accept the fact that your stylistic stipulations are applicable only to yourself.

Oh yeah, I ain't quite done yet, as the creative urge still permeates (and radiates). You see, this is quite the stress relief for me. It's like sandboxian verbiage. A veritable vortex of sandboxian verbiage. Lucid, livid, lively, lovely, luscious and inspirational illiteration.

Oh, what a rush.

Ya-ya.

 

[Keldorn]

...irradiate?

Yeah, Keldorn often seems quite radiant if you think about it.

"I saw a 3d RPG the other day."
"Horrible creatures, I avoid them whenever I can."

I grant thee thy (Pseudo)3D liberty, so as to hope for genuine 2d liberty in return.

But remember, I am merely a servant. A servant righteously focused on the task of preventing the extinction of CRPG isometry.

 

[1eyedking]

Oooh, another hyper-sensitive, stylistic constrictoid, demanding conformity to his personal expressive preferences. I don't try at all, I just ad lib. It's silly, wild, wacky, frolicky, and very fun if you get into it. Your only hope is to repress and ignore me, or accept the fact that your stylistic stipulations are applicable only to yourself.

Oh yeah, I ain't quite done yet, as the creative urge still permeates (and radiates). You see, this is quite the stress relief for me. It's like sandboxian verbiage. A veritable vortex of sandboxian verbiage. Lucid, livid, lively, lovely, luscious and inspirational illiteration.

Oh, what a rush.

Ya-ya.

Are you on drugs?

 

[Keldorn]

Not yet (it's early).


Are you always such an intolerant & miserable pea-brain ?

 

[Mr Happy]

God damnit, I already explained why this is not a valid argument against isometric view and for first person perspective. Jeez.

What are you on? Has that perspective ever even been used in an rpg? I don't consider it a viable alternative and apparently neither does anyone else (thus it has gone unused). Honestly, if it had been used even once in an rpg you might have a point... When the actual first person perspective is possible why settle for a wonky simulation of it?

Well, that's dumb. Jagged Alliance 2 essentially is an RPG, as much as something like SS2 or Dues Ex is, and plenty of squad tactics games make use of line-of-sight, and many of these games have rpg elements. But, so what? It wouldn't matter if the only games that used it were pure action games. Your argument against the perspective was that it didn't limit "the players abilities to more accurately conform to his character's". But, it can perfectly well, and it's been done, and if you can call JA2 an rpg, then yes, it's been done in an rpg.

I'd hardly consider it a "wonky simulation" of first person perspective, because it can allow the "players abilites to more accurately conform to his character's", in terms of peripheral vision, and sound, especially in a party rpg/tactics game/ whatever.

 

[Lord Chambers]

Old turds are to isometric view what Mass Effect fans are to chocolate milk.

 

[Crazy_Vasey]

First person perspective in a computer game is not a valid restriction on what the character can see. The field of view is always much more restricted than what a human could actually see and there's not a lot to be done about it unless you're going to play the game across multiple monitors (and do any games even support that?). Well, unless someone's jabbed one of your eyes out or something.

 

[vrok]

They can still hear things moving around, you get a general direction if its far away ("Spider hears a faint sound coming from the southeast") or a pinpointed area if its loud. You couldn't really effectively pull that off in a first person game without some sort of inset map or a kickass surround sound system.

Actually you can, and you don't need a true surround sound system. Virtual surround with headphones (of course) does the job perfectly fine to be able to tell where weapons fire and footsteps are coming from, quite a lot of the time it's even easier to tell where sound is coming from than it is in real life. Most FPSs do this and have been for years. This is by far the preferred method of dealing with it instead of providing probable enemy location icons based on sound, for example, on the minimap in Battlefield. And right there you have another solution, or would you go so far (and you'd be wrong) as to consider implementing a minimap in a first person game ineffective?

First person perspective in a computer game is not a valid restriction on what the character can see. The field of view is always much more restricted than what a human could actually see and there's not a lot to be done about it unless you're going to play the game across multiple monitors (and do any games even support that?). Well, unless someone's jabbed one of your eyes out or something.

There's a reason widescreens were invented, and yes, plenty of games support multiple monitors, flight simulators being the obvious example. If you're still going to complain about widescreens not supporting accurate field of view in games then buy a bigger monitor until the sword or gun your character is holding is of realistic size, then you can complain if it still bothers you and go ahead and get multiple monitors, though I doubt it, unless of course you're being a cunt about it just because.

 

[Jasede]

I think this is the best thread to post this:

The fucking Final Fantasy IV DS trailer kicks ass. Holy shit. Production values, lord!

 

[OccupatedVoid]

Oooh, another hyper-sensitive, stylistic constrictoid, demanding conformity to his personal expressive preferences. I don't try at all, I just ad lib. It's silly, wild, wacky, frolicky, and very fun if you get into it. Your only hope is to repress and ignore me, or accept the fact that your stylistic stipulations are applicable only to yourself.

Oh yeah, I ain't quite done yet, as the creative urge still permeates (and radiates). You see, this is quite the stress relief for me. It's like sandboxian verbiage. A veritable vortex of sandboxian verbiage. Lucid, livid, lively, lovely, luscious and inspirational illiteration.

Oh, what a rush.

Ya-ya.

Are you on drugs?

Drugs are good. Mkay?

 

[Sovy Kurosei]

I think this is the best thread to post this:

The fucking Final Fantasy IV DS trailer kicks ass. Holy shit. Production values, lord!

Final Fantasy VI remake plz.