1279 réponses à ce sujet

[JrayM16]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Still wondering why people think its ok to try and dictate how to view and more importantly play an RPG. If Sylvius wants to use his imagination to better play out his characters and he has fun doing that, what's the problem? I much do the same thing.

I have no problem with it in and of itself.  It's totally fine.  I just have a problem with him saying that  any game design that doesn't completely accomodate his way of playing is wrong.

[JrayM16]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

I am playing a role, and the various extremeities of the game are outside the game's reality, as tools helping me to effectively play that role.

Just like the dialogue options.  They exist outside the game's reality.

Exactly.  But, the dialogue options are something that NPCs react to to some degree, while they do not react at all to a targeting reticule. 

The fact that dialogue options appear is outsie the games reality, but the lines are inside the reality.

[TheMufflon]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Just like the dialogue options.  They exist outside the game's reality.

The selection is part of the interface, but the dialogue itself is part of the story because the characters react to it.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

JrayM16 wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Still wondering why people think its ok to try and dictate how to view and more importantly play an RPG. If Sylvius wants to use his imagination to better play out his characters and he has fun doing that, what's the problem? I much do the same thing.

I have no problem with it in and of itself.  It's totally fine.  I just have a problem with him saying that  any game design that doesn't completely accomodate his way of playing is wrong.

Its crap design imo to move away from that style, in order to go the hollywood interactive movie route but considering we've gone full circle with this argument 10 times already, whats the point?

[JrayM16]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

JrayM16 wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Still wondering why people think its ok to try and dictate how to view and more importantly play an RPG. If Sylvius wants to use his imagination to better play out his characters and he has fun doing that, what's the problem? I much do the same thing.

I have no problem with it in and of itself.  It's totally fine.  I just have a problem with him saying that  any game design that doesn't completely accomodate his way of playing is wrong.

Its crap design imo to move away from that style, in order to go the hollywood interactive movie route but considering we've gone full circle with this argument 10 times already, whats the point?

Alright, I propose an idea.  Let's all agree to disagree and just walk away from this forum. 

[TheMufflon]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Its crap design imo to move away from that style, in order to go the hollywood interactive movie route but considering we've gone full circle with this argument 10 times already, whats the point?

But that's what it always has been. You've never had infinite choices, you have always been limited by what the developers give you: CRPG:s have always been and will always be much closer to interactive movies than to actual role-playing games.

[Sylvius the Mad]

TheMufflon wrote...

The selection is part of the interface, but the dialogue itself is part of the story because the characters react to it.

\\
The characters react to something.  But we never see it.

[JrayM16]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

TheMufflon wrote...

The selection is part of the interface, but the dialogue itself is part of the story because the characters react to it.

\\\\
The characters react to something.  But we never see it.

But the reactions tell us virtually everything we need to know to determine what was said.

[Meltemph]

Again, you are essentially arguing we should all rely on a form of psychosis for interacting with the dialog in DAO...

[TheMufflon]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

The characters react to something.  But we never see it.

They react to me pressing a button on my keyboard. I base my decision upon the lines written by the developers. The NPCs respond with lines written by the developers, conditioned to my decision.

I suppose you could close your eyes and pretened they react to something different, but you could do the same when reading a book. But most of us are not content to ignore what goes on on the screen.

Modifié par TheMufflon, 04 octobre 2010 - 11:29 .

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

TheMufflon wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Its crap design imo to move away from that style, in order to go the hollywood interactive movie route but considering we've gone full circle with this argument 10 times already, whats the point?

But that's what it always has been. You've never had infinite choices, you have always been limited by what the developers give you: CRPG:s have always been and will always be much closer to interactive movies than to actual role-playing games.

Sure because removing the ability to even remotely roleplay at all, should definately be something they strive to do. Thanks for proving the point that the whole movement towards "interactive movies" isn't aparticularly good one.

[Morroian]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Sure because removing the ability to even remotely roleplay at all, should definately be something they strive to do. Thanks for proving the point that the whole movement towards "interactive movies" isn't aparticularly good one.

Strawman, they're not removing the ability to role play at all.

[TheMufflon]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Sure because removing the ability to even remotely roleplay at all, should definately be something they strive to do. Thanks for proving the point that the whole movement towards "interactive movies" isn't aparticularly good one.

The only move that is being made is going from choose-your-own-adventure books to interactive movies. Wake up and smell the ashes.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Morroian wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...
Sure because removing the ability to even remotely roleplay at all, should definately be something they strive to do. Thanks for proving the point that the whole movement towards "interactive movies" isn't aparticularly good one.

Strawman, they're not removing the ability to role play at all.

Not really, having a voiced PC makes it pretty damn difficult to role play in the first place.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

TheMufflon wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Sure because removing the ability to even remotely roleplay at all, should definately be something they strive to do. Thanks for proving the point that the whole movement towards "interactive movies" isn't aparticularly good one.

The only move that is being made is going from choose-your-own-adventure books to interactive movies. Wake up and smell the ashes.

Right and it's a terrible move imo. Because you have much less roleplaying freedom with a voiced PC.

[Sylvius the Mad]

JrayM16 wrote...

But the reactions tell us virtually everything we need to know to determine what was said.

Aside from that being untrue, by then it's too late.  The PC has already said whatever he said howerver he said it.

Causality only works going forward.  We can't change the PC's delivery of the line to match the subsequent reaction - what if that new delivery is a line the PC can't have uttered without breaking character?

[Sylvius the Mad]

TheMufflon wrote...

Wake up and smell the ashes.

I'm not just going to sit here and accept it without comment (assuming it's true, which I do not).

[Sylvius the Mad]

Meltemph wrote...

Again, you are essentially arguing we should all rely on a form of psychosis for interacting with the dialog in DAO...

I don't understand what you mean by that.

[upsettingshorts]

As someone who watched in horror as the flight sim genre withered and died, I am glad that as a supporter of the whole move towards "interactive movie" RPGs - as it is so derisively called - is the first gaming trend to be advancing in a direction I prefer.

So therefore I'll shrug off the attempts to label my preference as "crap" because, well, I've been there - seeing the genre I liked changing in ways I didn't. But that's not going to stop me from being absolutely giddy for where the CRPG genre is headed.

The point of this post?  To remind some people that intelligent people of taste with the ability to think critically can arrive at different conclusions.

(I'd say an actual example of an interactive movie would be the FMV parts of the Wing Commander series, for example)

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 05 octobre 2010 - 12:03 .

[TheMufflon]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Aside from that being untrue, by then it's too late.  The PC has already said whatever he said howerver he said it.

Causality only works going forward.  We can't change the PC's delivery of the line to match the subsequent reaction - what if that new delivery is a line the PC can't have uttered without breaking character?

The delivery doesn't change, only our perception of it changes. Which is why as much information as possible should be provided about it.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

As someone who watched in horror as the flight sim genre withered and died, I am glad that as a supporter of the whole move towards "interactive movie" RPGs - as it is so derisively called - is the first gaming trend to be advancing in a direction I prefer.

So therefore I'll shrug off the attempts to label my preference as "crap" because, well, I've been there - seeing the genre I liked changing in ways I didn't. But that's not going to stop me from being absolutely giddy for where the CRPG genre is headed.

(I'd say an actual example of an interactive movie would be the FMV parts of the Wing Commander series, for example)

So that makes it ok for those content with the genre as it was? Tiny bit hypocritical doncha think? I'm still trying to figure out, considering there's still a market for the type of game BG and DA:O are, why there's a need to Mass Effect it when they already have Mass Effect.

I wonder how much its going to bite them in the end when the trends shifts and people move back onto FPS'es or RTS'es or whatever the next big thing is going to be.

Do they then reach back out to that portion of their fanbase they're so eager to toss away and say "Hey we want to make games you'll enjoy again"? Or will it be too late at that point and EA ends up shuttering them for sagging sales.

Modifié par CoS Sarah Jinstar, 05 octobre 2010 - 12:09 .

[Morroian]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Not really, having a voiced PC makes it pretty damn difficult to role play in the first place.

Not really so long as the voice actor is good. I guess I just internalise the voice as my characters voice and accept it, at least I did in Mass Effect.

[TheMufflon]

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

I wonder how much its going to bite them in the end when the trends shifts and people move back onto FPS'es or RTS'es or whatever the next big thing is going to be.

Those are the current 'big things', and they have been for quite some time.

[CoS Sarah Jinstar]

Morroian wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Not really, having a voiced PC makes it pretty damn difficult to role play in the first place.

Not really so long as the voice actor is good. I guess I just internalise the voice as my characters voice and accept it, at least I did in Mass Effect.

At that point you're not really roleplaying at all though since tone and delivery is already predetermined and scripted to the point of no return.

[ErichHartmann]

Gotta love people's arbitrary views of "roleplaying". /shakes head