Gatt9 wrote...
FlyingWalrus wrote...
This song and dance again.
EDIT: But now I am glad I went back and did a little waltz, because I got to see Phaedon and others take Gatt9 and his logical gymnastics to the woodshed something fierce. Damn, son. Me gusta.
Not really, In Exile's a challenge, but Phaedon?Lolno.Gatt9 wrote...
Acdtually, what you've pretty consistently demonstrated is a major break in logic. It's really this simple...
Assert - A game with a story and decisions is an RPG
-Halo had a story
-Wing Commander 3 had decisions
-Halo is an FPS
-Wing Commander 3 is a Space-Sim
-Contradiction
Your arguements fail quickly, because logically they don't work once you leave the Mass-Effect universe. My arguements OTOH, pass the test. My definition is simple, can it be translated to PnP. If it cannot, it's not an RPG. Any example you come up with is going to be a LARPS, not an RPG.
Your assertion is the one that you like to see, just like you only see what you want to see in RPGs.
What I call an RPG in my opinion is a game that allows you a great deal of control over the: a) creation of your own character and his or her personality,The development of this personality as well as the plot by allowing choices, c) Allowing the player to develop how that character thinks or fights, etc.
Let's see what YOU think of RPGs.
"Defines a character whose success/failures occur independent of the Player."
-The Sims have statistical progresson, inventory and success/failures occur independent of the Player.
-Syberia has an inventory. All items are useful.
-Call of Duty has loot.
-In backgammon, success/failures occur independent of the Player.
Now read that carefully. Now watch this, I'll narrow it down some so it become obvious...My definition is simple, can it be translated to PnP. If it cannot, it's not an RPG.
To which the response was...Let's see what YOU think of RPGs.
"Defines a character whose success/failures occur independent of the Player."
-The Sims have statistical progresson, inventory and success/failures occur independent of the Player.
-Syberia has an inventory. All items are useful.
-Call of Duty has loot.
-In backgammon, success/failures occur independent of the Player.
Do you know Logic at all? Generally speaking, to refute an assertion, you actually need to talk about something associated with the assertion. Phaedon completely ignores the assertion and starts talking about something completely different. His reponse might as well have been "I like Bananna's" for all he proves. It's pretty much the definition of a Strawman, he completely ignores what I said.
Which pretty much describes all of his responses thus far. Go read carefully, go Gatt -> Phaedon through the thread, each and every time he'll ignore what I said and come up with some quite literally bizarre.
@In Exile
What you're missing is that people are asserting "Story and Decisions" as the necessary condition. They're asserting "If a game has Story and Decisions it's an RPG". Which formally is translating to
If X and Y then Z
as well as
if Z then X and Y
They're stating that X and Y are all that's necessary to obtain Z, and that Z is comprised of X and Y. While we both realize that it's a case of "If X and Y then maybe Z", that's not the statement they are putting forth. Most especially Phaedon.
What you're saying would be true if the assertion were "If a game has a story OR decisions it's an RPG", or if they were saying "If a game has AT LEAST a story and decisions it's an RPG", or if they were saying "A game with stats can be an RPG". But they're not even asserting that, they're asserting that the stats are irrelevant to the quality RPG, and that a Story and Decisions are necessary today, but stats are optional.
As such, it's a statement of necessity, and logically it fails.
Beyond that, too, we are stating what we want as the mechanics, and there are a lot of us. A legion of ME fans right now just in the Bethesda forums are furious at what they see in ME3...where the direction is going. Some are so disappointed that they seriously said they no longer are interested in it and vow they are done with it.
These apologists use the methodology of assuming we believe ME was perfect in its rpg mechanics and use that as a backdrop for their argument. So what you get from their babble is an argument based off of a false premise and a false inference, not an true, legitimate and accurate axiom.
It's odd, too, because I think i would enjoy combat so much more and would even enjoy corridor segments if it was overall more balanced. But when the shooter fans saw Mass Effect, many played it thinking it was a shooter because it had shooter combat. They wanted to make it more of a shooter to their liking, and it made a host of rpg fans very disappointed. Now that we are pushing back, they are in defense mode. Bigtime. Now they don't want it to change back to a stats based system....one more cleaner, advanced and efficient.
With this and Dragon Age 2 (they think we are bad....they should go look around in the dragon age 2 forums), you see the trend. Trust me when i say this....many fans want to just complete the trilogy and are hoping BioWare changes course here. And Dragon Age 2....really, how many fans so pissed at how DA2 was dumbed down are going to buy Dragon Age 3? They aren't buying on the game title anymore because it is a sequel to a get rich and thick rpg.
The Biodrones also falsely infer we so-called 'elitists' don't want change....indeed...that is what most liked about the original Mass Effect. But there is a point where if too much is yanked, it isn't a game we want to olay or expect from a great developer of rpgs that BioWare has been since their beginning. And BioWare was the best and still would be if they didn't want to appeal to casual gamers and force experienced gamers to, sometimes in their own individual perspective, play a simple game that provides little challenge.
Retour en haut
