147 réponses à ce sujet

[Eurypterid]

Moving to Off Topic...

[Volourn]

"1) A game with multiple dialogue options, not the lame "dialogue wheel" copied from that platform shooter mass effect"

Not classic RPG.

"2) A game that is actually difficult, not by virtue of monsters having a billion HP and absurd damage, spawning in waves out of nowhere, but by having smart AI, interesting abilities and responding to player's tactics."

Not classic RPG.

"3) Stats that are incorporated into RPing - like STR being used for smashing doors/locks or intimidation, Charisma for persuasion, intellect for solving puzzles, dexterity for avoiding traps etc?"

Not classic RPG.

"4) A LONG single player campaign with epic storyline, atmosphere, lots of interesting locations and properly developed companions. Story where choices you make MATTER and impact the game world in a meaningful way."

Not classic RPG.

"5) A proper inventory system with plenty of junk items that so upsets the "casual" gamer."

classic RPG.

"6) A game that rewards, tactical thinking and not spamming buttons in order for "something cool to happen"

Not classic RPG.

"7) A freedom of stat/gear customization to build your character how you want without fear to confuse "casuals""

classic RPG.

"8) Some frustrating elements to actually feel good when you accomplish something and not being handed everything on a silver platter, because the former option is not "fun" - no more healing to full instantly after every battle, make health potions limited in supply etc.."

Not classic RPG..

"9) Freedom to do things that might have irreversible consequences (such as killing crucial NPC or pissing off entire town, if you do something stupid)"

Not classic RPG.


"10) A game not available for consoles"

Or PC.

[Bryy_Miller]

[quote]wowpwnslol wrote...

1) A game with multiple dialogue options, not the lame "dialogue wheel" copied from that platform shooter mass effect[/quote]

Multiple dialogue options, while fun, only gives the dreaded "Illusion of Choice".

Baldur's Gate was awesome, yes, but how many of those options really changed anything?

[quote]2) A game that is actually difficult, not by virtue of monsters having a billion HP and absurd damage, spawning in waves out of nowhere, but by having smart AI, interesting abilities and responding to player's tactics.[/quote]

Difficulty in RPGs is limited in a much more restrictive sense than a platformer.

[quote]3) Stats that are incorporated into RPing - like STR being used for smashing doors/locks or intimidation, Charisma for persuasion, intellect for solving puzzles, dexterity for avoiding traps etc?[/quote]

DA:O, 2, and the ME series were all about this.

[quote]4) A LONG single player campaign with epic storyline, atmosphere, lots of interesting locations and properly developed companions. [/quote]

This is entirely subjective. Besides the obvious, length/quantity does not always translate into quality.

[quote]Story where choices you make MATTER and impact the game world in a meaningful way.[/quote]

This is incredibly hard to do, since everyone needs to be able to get the full (and basically the same) experience while playing the game.

Having every single decision change the game in a completely new way is almost impossible.

[quote]5) A proper inventory system with plenty of junk items that so upsets the "casual" gamer.[/quote]

Are you saying that RPGs need to be clunky and messy in order to be "real"? 

[quote]6) A game that rewards, tactical thinking and not spamming buttons in order for "something cool to happen"[/quote]

What does this even mean? 

[quote]7) A freedom of stat/gear customization to build your character how you want without fear to confuse "casuals"[/quote]

Please stop being so condescending. It does not help your cause.

Last I checked, customization was still in all of the major RPGs.

[quote]8) Some frustrating elements to actually feel good when you accomplish something and not being handed everything on a silver platter, because the former option is not "fun" - no more healing to full instantly after every battle, make health potions limited in supply etc...[/quote]

Why do you need to feel frustrated to feel like you accomplished something? 

[quote]9) Freedom to do things that might have irreversible consequences (such as killing crucial NPC or pissing off entire town, if you do something stupid)[/quote]

You can also do this in most major RPGs.

[quote]10) A game not available for consoles[/quote]

Yeah. I'm not even going to touch this one.

[Tommy6860]

XxTaLoNxX wrote...


Ok, I'm going to attempt to tackle this question and help you understand what PC Gamers are talking about when they say stop consolizing games.

1) Mouse + Keyboard (there are gaming specific varieties) is always going to be 1000% more effective than a controller.

Most definitely, but that is in the context of using it solely on a PC, it is more convenient for accessiblity since very few people use gaming rigs solely as just gaming rigs; they also use them for their everyday desktop apps as well. That's the relevance of having M&K, since M&K (it used to be keyboard only long ago) have always been part of a PC input interface and evolved as such, simply carried over from typewriters . Many people who play racing and flight sims, etc on PC are using controllers that are less complex than the some console controller game set-ups, and they (for the most part) don't use their M&K as the input devices.

2) There are only so many buttons on a console's controller and so game developers who are going to market a cross-platform game have to keep that in consideration. This involves (at times) a significant reduction in features and requires the developer to "streamline" or "dumb-down" some features.

Sorry, but that isn't true. Controllers are simply a fact due to the evolution of the console platform, there have always been controllers for them and not keyboards (for the most part). M&K and controllers are no more than command input devices and any developer can combo all sorts of commands with today's controllers in the script of the games. A 360 controller technically has 14 pushable buttons, add combo features to them and you can get complex commands, though obviously not as many as a keyboard. But in reality, how many keyboard/mouse commands do most PC games set up by default? Controller commands are just simplified to appeal to console gamers who for the most part don't care for complex commands and they are scripted that way, not they they are not capable of such.

3) 1080p resolution is NOTHING compared to a PC's 1600x1200 resolution. PERIOD! The graphic capabilities for a PC far outstrip anything a console could ever hope to achieve. Unless you know, SkyNet becomes self aware and decides it likes to play with itself.....

This is only partially true. A 1080P picture can have higer resoluton textures than a 1200p picture. Those numbers only represent pixels in the context of how you give them here, not the detail of the textures. To have higher res textures most definitely requires more powerful hardware though, so in that respect, consoles cannot touch a PC aside from the CPU power deficiencies the consoles also have. Asiide from that, 1080P is simply the limitation of HDTvs, not the console. The console is simply designed to that limitaiton so it cannot be ramped up.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 13 avril 2011 - 10:05 .

[Tommy6860]

Volourn wrote...


"10) A game not available for consoles"

Or PC.

So, you'd be happy just to play Farmville on your everyday common desktop, or table-top games only?

[Tommy6860]

tez19 wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

tez19 wrote...

LOL, i despise pc gamers because of their attitudes..

And your point is moot since you exhibit the same kind of bias you complain PC gamers have against console gamers. If my point riles you, then maybe that should give you pause. I don't care either way as gamers like what they like, no matter the patform, but you have a bad hsitory here of offering little to no thoughtful opinions, yet post plenty of spiteful remarks. IIRC, you were even spanked by the EA staff and got a suspended for it. 

 I hardly come on here any longer as i cannot put up with the self entitled bile you people spew. I only came on here to see if there was news of a patch and i see you people making threads like this. Laughable.

Yet the ugliest side you claim that comes from we purported PC gamers, seems to be the best you can offer here. I don't care either way for bile remarks, but making blanket statements regarding a certain group says more about you, than it does about the veracity of your claims.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 13 avril 2011 - 10:29 .

[Bryy_Miller]

Tommy6860 wrote...

Volourn wrote...


"10) A game not available for consoles"

Or PC.

So, you'd be happy just to play Farmville on your everyday common desktop, or table-top games only?

I don't even know how that strawman makes any sense.

[Tommy6860]

BobSmith101 wrote...

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

xkg wrote...

i agree with 1) and 2)

but not 3) - simply because 1080p is actualy higher resolution than 1600x1200 :

1600x1200 = 1920000 pixels
1920x1080 = 2073600 pixels

True, but that's also not the max resolution for computers. Also of note, computers have better anti-alaising(sp?) and higher resolution texture packs.

A new gaming specialized computer will shame the graphic capabilities of a console everytime.

True, but what sort of PC can you get for the price of a console? Must be frustrating though (as a former PC gamer) to spend so much on a PC and get the same sort of results.
Graphics even if they are better are not that different. It's not like the great leaps from CGA to VGA etc.

It's much less about the graphics IMO, though graphics play a role, than it is the experience. You have way more depth and immersion using the input hardware on PC than you do using a controller. Since it relates mostly to RPGs, RPGs tend to play in a more complex system than do most other genres (maybe RTS' are more complex). Controllers setups for RPGs on consoles are for ease to the limitations of the console controller.

[Tommy6860]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

Volourn wrote...


"10) A game not available for consoles"

Or PC.

So, you'd be happy just to play Farmville on your everyday common desktop, or table-top games only?

I don't even know how that strawman makes any sense.

Why is it strawman? I didn't make the comment, he did. He actually is eliminating two platforms in his example, I only followed his post with a relevant question. Bsides, you may want to learn what using "strawman" tactics means. Hint, it isn't used when asking a question.

[Bryy_Miller]

Tommy6860 wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

Volourn wrote...


"10) A game not available for consoles"

Or PC.

So, you'd be happy just to play Farmville on your everyday common desktop, or table-top games only?

I don't even know how that strawman makes any sense.

Why is it strawman? I didn't make the comment, he did. He actually is eliminating two platforms in his example, I only followed his post with a relevant question. Bsides, you may want to learn what using "strawman" tactics means. Hint, it isn't used when asking a question.

He said the classic RPG is not PC, which was a Perspective response in reply to a guy saying "classic" RPGs are not console games (when they relaly, really are). To which you responded with "well, that obviously means you love Farmville".

How is that not a strawman?

More-so, how does that make any sense? FarmVille is a computer game. How can you not play it on PC?

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 13 avril 2011 - 10:40 .

[wizardryforever]

As far as the whole PC vs Console goes, I'll repost what I said a while ago in another thread.  Though the topic is getting tiresome.

Game consoles have existed for almost as long as PC games.  People act
like this is a new phenomenon simply because the consoles are getting so
sophisticated now that they start to infringe on the PC game market and
draw publishers away from the PC as a platform.  One of the reasons why
current consoles became popular is the "plug-and-play" quality of
consoles.  You don't have to install games, you don't have to worry
about operating system or DirectX compatibility, you don't have to deal
with headaches like SecuRom, nor do you have to worry about the system
being able to handle it.  Any game you buy for a specific console is
guaranteed to run on that console.  PC games require more time to get it
to work, and that relative inaccessibility puts some people off.  Are
these people "stupid" or "immature" or "ADD?"  No, they just prefer a
more casual approach to gaming.

Of course, the accessibility gap
between consoles and PC is growing narrower, which is fueling the
feeling of ostracization of PC gamers.  The whole victim mentality
(coupled with entitlement and superiority complexes) is made worse when
far more games come out for consoles than PCs nowadays.  I can
sympathize.  I didn't get a game console until 2005; for most of my life
I've been a PC gamer and I still love PC games.  But you have to
realize that plenty of games are much better suited to consoles, even
whole genres, like racing games.  These things have expanded the
industry, and many of the developers that work on PC games get much of
their funding from these console hits.  It seems counterproductive to
complain about these things, since it is all interrelated.

Back on topic, I would love a classic RPG in the vein of most Black Isle RPGs and other D&D games.  I don't think there's a big enough market for it to actually happen though.  Games nowadays take a buttload of money to make, and if it won't sell well, it doesn't get made, simple as that.  Not enough demand for this type of game means fewer games, simple as that.

[Tommy6860]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...

Volourn wrote...


"10) A game not available for consoles"

Or PC.

So, you'd be happy just to play Farmville on your everyday common desktop, or table-top games only?

I don't even know how that strawman makes any sense.

Why is it strawman? I didn't make the comment, he did. He actually is eliminating two platforms in his example, I only followed his post with a relevant question. Bsides, you may want to learn what using "strawman" tactics means. Hint, it isn't used when asking a question.

He said the classic RPG is not PC, which was a Perspective response in reply to a guy saying "classic" RPGs are not console games (when they relaly, really are). To which you responded with "well, that obviously means you love Farmville".

How is that not a strawman?

More-so, how does that make any sense? FarmVille is a computer game. How can you not play it on PC?

Wow, I can't believe someone actually got my question and turned it into meaning I made a claim. How do you get from my question that I somehow stated it means I think he loves Farmville, seriously? That's your interpretation and nothing of the sort in which I wwas responding in that context.

And you avoided my question and I mentioned "everyday common desktop" (meaning not a gaming PC). I didn't make the strawman, I only asked a question to what volourn would play if he got his way. I made no claim to a fact that could be challenged as "strawman", when I asked a question, and not made a statement.

If your goal is to translate what I say into something I didn't just because you can't answer my question, says more about you than it does about me supposedly making a claim that I didn't.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 13 avril 2011 - 11:30 .

[Bryy_Miller]

Tommy6860 wrote...
And you avoided my question and I mentioned "everyday common desktop" (meaning not a gaming PC).

Yes.

A PC.

A personal computer.

A computer.

I didn't make the strawman, I only asked a question to what volourn would play if he got his way.

Then you mistook his reply, just like you say I mistook yours.

He was saying that, while WoWPWNS says RPGs did not originate on the console (aka "classic"), he is saying they did not originate on the PC.

He was not saying that he "wanted" anything. He was showing PWNS how ridiculous his original statement was.

You were the one that took that to mean that he wanted to abolish RPGs on the computer.

If your goal is to translate what I say into something I didn't just because you can't answer my question, says more about you than it does about me supposedly making a claim that I didn't.

If you are going to attack anyone that does not understand you because of your use of language, then don't expect ot make many friends on the internet. 

[Tommy6860]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Tommy6860 wrote...
And you avoided my question and I mentioned "everyday common desktop" (meaning not a gaming PC).

Yes.

A PC.

A personal computer.

A computer.

I didn't make the strawman, I only asked a question to what volourn would play if he got his way.

Then you mistook his reply, just like you say I mistook yours.

He was saying that, while WoWPWNS says RPGs did not originate on the console (aka "classic"), he is saying they did not originate on the PC.

He was not saying that he "wanted" anything. He was showing PWNS how ridiculous his original statement was.

You were the one that took that to mean that he wanted to abolish RPGs on the computer.

If your goal is to translate what I say into something I didn't just because you can't answer my question, says more about you than it does about me supposedly making a claim that I didn't.

If you are going to attack anyone that does not understand you because of your use of language, then don't expect ot make many friends on the internet. 

My goal is not to make friends on the internet, especially in the medium of gaming forums. I read words and I respond to them accordingly. I make nothing personal of them, even when another twist my words into meaning something  I absolutely did not state. I don't take things personally on the net. I cannot help you want to deflect what I put in question form, into meaning something else in a way most human languages don't function. If you want to make a claim I said soemthing that I absolutely didn't, I honestly don't care. I know most logical thinking people can read for themselves and see I didn't convey a question into meaning I made a claim that a person likes playing a certain internet based game, as you said I did.

Enough already, I am done explaining my position that you clearly have no interest in taking seriously, other than for you to change it to the context that fits some very strange semantics, I have better things to do.

[Bryy_Miller]

My goal is not to make friends on the internet, especially in the medium of gaming forums.

But your goal is to be comprehensible, right? I mean, forums are not a one-way street. If you want to be understood, don't just shrug off people that don't see what you're getting at. 

I cannot help you want to deflect what I put in question form, into meaning something else in a way most human languages don't function. If you want to make a claim I said soemthing that I absolutely didn't, I honestly don't care. I know most logical thinking people can read for themselves and see I didn't convey a question into meaning I made a claim that a person likes playing a certain internet based game, as you said I did.

You said that there were two different kinds of computers that existed.

Anyways.
You were responding to a post that was not about what you thought it was.
That's all.

By the way, FarmVille IS a video game. It's a game played digitally. Please don't be elitist. Are you that threatened by FarmVille merely existing that you have to make ridiculous justifications as to why it's not a video game? Such as it doesn't run on the same type of platform that you use? 

They are both computers, just like a sports car is still just a car.

So it's casual? So what?

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 14 avril 2011 - 12:54 .

[casedawgz]

Bryy, you're the man.

[Bryy_Miller]

Elitism gets to me. The more ridiculous in nature, the more I just can't look away.

[casedawgz]

Yeah, the last item on the original list was the one that really got me.

[Clover Rider]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Elitism gets to me. The more ridiculous in nature, the more I just can't look away.

I know how you feel man.

Modifié par Some Geth, 14 avril 2011 - 01:06 .

[Bryy_Miller]

EDIT: Wrong thread.

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 16 avril 2011 - 10:44 .

[bussinrounds]

Dead State looks promising.

[Chanegade]

Age of Decadence and Dead State are coming out so yes maybe?
Also the only real RPGs are pen and paper RPGs. In my opinion, you can't call a computer RPG a "classic RPG"

[Chromie]

Witcher 2!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Character development

Chanegade never heard of Dead State. Sounds like yet another zombie game but an rpg? Sound interesting.

Modifié par Ringo12, 20 avril 2011 - 08:48 .