1002 réponses à ce sujet

[Prince Zeel]

Phaelducan wrote...

Logical fallacies in your argument, Zeel. "I find" is by definition your opinion, and stating that just because you don't believe something makes it untrue is by definition fallacious.

Also, you don't quantify "glorified" by referencing ME's shooter qualities. I cite Gears of War as Mass Effect 2's most direct comparison in terms of combat. However, Gears has functionally no RPG element at all. By "glorifying" do you mean adding a bunch of RPG elements?

If a bunch of RPG elements can be quantified, then the comparison can be made between ME2 and any other RPG out there.

Don't you start with me. What "logical" fallacy is in my argument. I will smash your head and eat it.

and you bet your ass its *MY* opinion, guess who's posting it?

Mass effect 3 is nothing but a bang bang shooter with stupid skanks to flirt with and renegade interupts so losers at home feel like badasses. I'm sorry, ME3 removed, inventory, exploration and everything it could so it could APPEAL to the fcktard halo fans. 

[ItsPhilsTime]

Fiddles_stix wrote...

To be honest I don't think of ME1, 2 or 3 as RPGs, they have RPG elements but just because they're heavy on story I wouldn't call them RPGs.

I wouldn't even call DA:O or DA2 RPGs really, action RPGs maybe but I think there's a greater problem here of unnecessary labelling becoming coercive rather than constructive.

Thats actually more of what were used to, before they were called RPG's now we know the ones we always know as RPG's are now know as Turn-Based RPG's, It has all the fundelments we use to in RPG's(ME1 at least) being able to customize almost everything and story, the whole 10 yards Role playing Story. All it is they broke it away and ME wasn't first to do it, I don't know what the first action RPG was but it was for computer and a few of my friends played it. But I fell in love with FF 12 when it came out cus of its style of play, to bad its old, and dont have a PS2 and not going to get it. lol.

[Phaelducan]

Hmm, I can see by your signature that you have some comprehension issues with logic. So with all good intent, I shall now labor to assist you.

Start here.

http://www.theskepti...lfallacies.aspx

That will give you a good start on understanding why your argument is invalid.

Pay particular attention to "Argument from Personal Incredulity." That is the primary fallacy you are utilizing to incorrectly argue your point.

Also, "False Continuum" is used by you in your argument by assuming that no middle ground can possibly exist.

I realize this will sound condescending and arrogant, and I apologize in advance for that. I'm honestly trying to help you out. In understanding where we are being illogical, we can make better arguments that will enrich the BSN as a whole.

[Phaelducan]

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

Fiddles_stix wrote...

To be honest I don't think of ME1, 2 or 3 as RPGs, they have RPG elements but just because they're heavy on story I wouldn't call them RPGs.

I wouldn't even call DA:O or DA2 RPGs really, action RPGs maybe but I think there's a greater problem here of unnecessary labelling becoming coercive rather than constructive.

Thats actually more of what were used to, before they were called RPG's now we know the ones we always know as RPG's are now know as Turn-Based RPG's, It has all the fundelments we use to in RPG's(ME1 at least) being able to customize almost everything and story, the whole 10 yards Role playing Story. All it is they broke it away and ME wasn't first to do it, I don't know what the first action RPG was but it was for computer and a few of my friends played it. But I fell in love with FF 12 when it came out cus of its style of play, to bad its old, and dont have a PS2 and not going to get it. lol.

Interesting point. Turn-based versus active was a pretty big shift in the JRPG genre. Final Fantasy 12 also added that whole AI component where you didn't need to really control 2/3 of the party. Fair to say that it was just as much of an RPG as FFIX or X? I would say yes, that the changes to the norm were not enough to remove it from the category.

[Prince Zeel]

Phaelducan wrote...

Hmm, I can see by your signature that you have some comprehension issues with logic. So with all good intent, I shall now labor to assist you.

Start here.

http://www.theskepti...lfallacies.aspx

That will give you a good start on understanding why your argument is invalid.

Pay particular attention to "Argument from Personal Incredulity." That is the primary fallacy you are utilizing to incorrectly argue your point.

Also, "False Continuum" is used by you in your argument by assuming that no middle ground can possibly exist.

I realize this will sound condescending and arrogant, and I apologize in advance for that. I'm honestly trying to help you out. In understanding where we are being illogical, we can make better arguments that will enrich the BSN as a whole.

yay! new agnostics! They find a couple of logical fallacy sites and they think they are the best debater since toast bread. Let me explain something to you. just because you're new to logical fallacies, doesn't mean everyone else is. I' already understand logical fallacies and a lot MORE than you do. So you need to peddle this else where

Argument from Personal Incredulity: Try as you might, you will not fit me in here. The argument isn't. I CANT CONCIEVE of Mass effect 3 being an rpg, so it isn't. THe argument, now pay attention, is that Me3 is streamlined to death, its a rpg in the very basic way that its an rpg. it does not have all the rpg aspects of its predecessors and I dare you to disagree.


False Continuum: This kind of DOES NOT WORK when we are talking about genres. you don't make books that KIND of are mysteries, or KIND OF romances. What happens is its either apart of a genre, a mix of a genre or it gets its own. There is no inbetween RPG genre, for mass effect 3 to linger in. it's either one or its not.




is there a logical fallacy for not arguing your side and just yelling "LOGICAL FALLACY" Oh yes, its call and Ad hominem

Modifié par Prince Zeel, 08 octobre 2011 - 12:01 .

[Phaelducan]

Hmm, well with all due respect Zeel, I feel that I have argued my side extensively, with calm, detached, and rational points.

I have not attacked your character, but rather your points. Specifically I have argued about the various labels and definitions of the discussion at hand. That by definition is not ad hominem. However, you have threatened me with violence, called me names, and attacked me as a person. That by definition, is ad hominem.

Additionally, by telling me that you have a better understanding of the criteria being discussed, that is also (by definition) "Argument from authority" which is another fallacy. Keep in mind, that even if what you claim is true, that you do know more about logic than I do, that would irrelevant and fallacious to use as a basis for me to accept your assertion that ...

Quote
"Don't you start with me. What "logical" fallacy is in my argument. I will smash your head and eat it.

and you bet your ass its *MY* opinion, guess who's posting it?

Mass effect 3 is nothing but a bang bang shooter with stupid skanks to flirt with and renegade interupts so losers at home feel like badasses. I'm sorry, ME3 removed, inventory, exploration and everything it could so it could APPEAL to the fcktard halo fans. "

End quote.

Finally If you claim that you've learned how to conduct yourself (your words), then show it.

Moving on, trying to get this back on topic.

Quote
"False Continuum: This kind of DOES NOT WORK when we are talking about genres. you don't make books that KIND of are mysteries, or KIND OF romances. What happens is its either apart of a genre, a mix of a genre or it gets its own. There is no inbetween RPG genre, for mass effect 3 to linger in. it's either one or its not."
End Quote

I find that to be inaccurate. The Hobbit by Tolkien was considered to be Fantasy as well as Children's literature. So were the Narnia books by Lewis. A sub genre of children's fantasy is still a work of fantasy and a work of children's lit. It is both. Mysteries? Look at Dean Koontz. "...He also frequently incorporates elements of horror[/i], science fiction, mystery, and satire."

I'm not a fan of the guy, buy right there is a perfect counter-example to your premise. He incorporates elements of ALL of those things. Many of his books are kind of romantic, kind of mysterious, kind of horrific, kind of satirical, and kind of science-fictiony. There are MANY inbetweens in genre's, which is why the term "hybrid" even applies to the discussion. Action-RPG, Stealth-Action, Tactical-Espionage, the list goes on and on. Your False Continuum is quite literally, false.

Modifié par Phaelducan, 08 octobre 2011 - 12:17 .

[Il Divo]

Prince Zeel wrote...

is there a logical fallacy for not arguing your side and just yelling "LOGICAL FALLACY" Oh yes, its call and Ad hominem

Do you have any idea what an Ad Hominem even is?

[ItsPhilsTime]

Phaelducan wrote...

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

Thats actually more of what were used to, before they were called RPG's now we know the ones we always know as RPG's are now know as Turn-Based RPG's, It has all the fundelments we use to in RPG's(ME1 at least) being able to customize almost everything and story, the whole 10 yards Role playing Story. All it is they broke it away and ME wasn't first to do it, I don't know what the first action RPG was but it was for computer and a few of my friends played it. But I fell in love with FF 12 when it came out cus of its style of play, to bad its old, and dont have a PS2 and not going to get it. lol.

Interesting point. Turn-based versus active was a pretty big shift in the JRPG genre. Final Fantasy 12 also added that whole AI component where you didn't need to really control 2/3 of the party. Fair to say that it was just as much of an RPG as FFIX or X? I would say yes, that the changes to the norm were not enough to remove it from the category.

Well 12 wasn't turn-based, it wasn't action but not next closest thing I think it was listed as the same as 7 & 8 Real-time RPG right. But when I first heard about it and you could only control 1 player at a time I didn't like how it sound, the only one I played like that before was Kingdom hearts but I did like it. To bad I was like halfway through the game and had to leave not one but two memory cards at the gaming area. Had left 3 there in total but the last 2 really counted cus they had my FF on them, other one was strictly my Sports game, if you remember or ever played sports games one memory card would be completely full by just saving one game LOL. that so sucked.

[Phaelducan]

Il Divo wrote...

Prince Zeel wrote...

is there a logical fallacy for not arguing your side and just yelling "LOGICAL FALLACY" Oh yes, its call and Ad hominem

Do you have any idea what an Ad Hominem even is?

That didn't bother me nearly as much as calling me an agnostic. 

[Prince Zeel]

Phaelducan wrote...

Hmm, well with all due respect Zeel, I feel that I have argued my side extensively, with calm, detached, and rational points.

There's nothing "calm" about coming at me with a bunch of logical fallacy attacks. You
can atleast do me the courtesy of arguing my points. Nothing upsets me more than some  dude  striding in, shouting at the top of his lungs  "YOURE WRONG" and then not backing it up. You may think you've been "nice", but its the sort of passive agressiveness that I find the most agriviating. Which is why I responded in kind.

I have not attacked your character, but rather your points. Specifically I have argued about the various labels and definitions of the discussion at hand. That by definition is not ad hominem. However, you have threatened me with violence, called me names, and attacked me as a person. That by definition, is ad hominem.

Nor did I threaten you with violence, if you think "I'll smash your head and eat it" is a real threat that should be taken serious, you've got to start reading other lists. Especially since that still wouldn't make my post an ad hominem, what I do is like decorating a well executed argument. it's not insults instead of an arguments. It's an insults packaged with an argument. I've yet to find your argument, unless you think "LOGICAL FALLACY" is some end all be all super-counter-point of the universe.

Additionally, by telling me that you have a better understanding of the criteria being discussed, that is also (by definition) "Argument from authority" which is another fallacy. Keep in mind, that even if what you claim is true, that you do know more about logic than I do, that would irrelevant and fallacious to use as a basis for me to accept your assertion that ...

You just don't learn do you, I just debunked both your logical claims ( now the third) and you continue to name drop like Hollywood screen writer. Let me just keep debunking your fallacies until _YOU_GET_IT.

it is not an argument from authority, because guess what followed? me PROVING i know more about logical fallacies than you and I'm doing it again. it's like you don't quite understand these fallacies.

Finally If you claim that you've learned how to conduct yourself (your words), then show it.

Oh damn. here I was expecting an argument and yet you still don't deliver. How long do you want me to play testicular ping pong with your cocunuts? keep throwing out this logical fallacies, I'll gladly debunk them

Modifié par Prince Zeel, 08 octobre 2011 - 12:21 .

[Phaelducan]

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

Thats actually more of what were used to, before they were called RPG's now we know the ones we always know as RPG's are now know as Turn-Based RPG's, It has all the fundelments we use to in RPG's(ME1 at least) being able to customize almost everything and story, the whole 10 yards Role playing Story. All it is they broke it away and ME wasn't first to do it, I don't know what the first action RPG was but it was for computer and a few of my friends played it. But I fell in love with FF 12 when it came out cus of its style of play, to bad its old, and dont have a PS2 and not going to get it. lol.

Interesting point. Turn-based versus active was a pretty big shift in the JRPG genre. Final Fantasy 12 also added that whole AI component where you didn't need to really control 2/3 of the party. Fair to say that it was just as much of an RPG as FFIX or X? I would say yes, that the changes to the norm were not enough to remove it from the category.

Well 12 wasn't turn-based, it wasn't action but not next closest thing I think it was listed as the same as 7 & 8 Real-time RPG right. But when I first heard about it and you could only control 1 player at a time I didn't like how it sound, the only one I played like that before was Kingdom hearts but I did like it. To bad I was like halfway through the game and had to leave not one but two memory cards at the gaming area. Had left 3 there in total but the last 2 really counted cus they had my FF on them, other one was strictly my Sports game, if you remember or ever played sports games one memory card would be completely full by just saving one game LOL. that so sucked.

Yeah, thank god for built-in hard drives on consoles now. FF12 was the first RPG I ever played that literally played itself if you set your parameters a certain way. Certainly Oblivion, or even Quest for Glory in the old Sierra PC days could allow you do repetitive key-stroke your way to skill-ups, but FF12 could level your character for hours with the proper gambits.

I know for a fact that some people would argue that if you aren't even playing the game yet are advancing, it can't by definition be a role playing game, but I wouldn't make that argument. I think it's just another variation/innovation on the sub-genre. Liked by some, disliked probably by a few more, but no more or less relevant to the progression of the industry.

[Prince Zeel]

Il Divo wrote...

Prince Zeel wrote...

is there a logical fallacy for not arguing your side and just yelling "LOGICAL FALLACY" Oh yes, its call and Ad hominem

Do you have any idea what an Ad Hominem even is?

And another straggler comes up to bat. 

Yes, I do. Do you want to challenge me?

Substituting an insult for an argument is an ad hominem. 

[Il Divo]

Phaelducan wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Prince Zeel wrote...

is there a logical fallacy for not arguing your side and just yelling "LOGICAL FALLACY" Oh yes, its call and Ad hominem

Do you have any idea what an Ad Hominem even is?

That didn't bother me nearly as much as calling me an agnostic. 

Fair point, though I was thinking it's still a demonstration of his knowledge on logical fallacies (or lack of).

[Phaelducan]

Prince Zeel wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Hmm, well with all due respect Zeel, I feel that I have argued my side extensively, with calm, detached, and rational points.

There's nothing "calm" about coming at me with a bunch of logical fallacy attacks. You
can atleast do me the courtesy of arguing my points. Nothing upsets me more than some  dude  striding in, shouting at the top of his lungs  "YOURE WRONG" and then not backing it up. You may think you've been "nice", but its the sort of passive agressiveness that I find the most agriviating. Which is why I responded in kind.

I have not attacked your character, but rather your points. Specifically I have argued about the various labels and definitions of the discussion at hand. That by definition is not ad hominem. However, you have threatened me with violence, called me names, and attacked me as a person. That by definition, is ad hominem.

Nor did I threaten you with violence, if you think "I'll smash your head and eat it" is a real threat that should be taken serious, you've got to start reading other lists. Especially since that still wouldn't make my post an ad hominem, what I do is like decorating a well executed argument. it's not insults instead of an arguments. It's an insults packaged with an argument. I've yet to find your argument, unless you think "LOGICAL FALLACY" is some end all be all super-counter-point of the universe.

Additionally, by telling me that you have a better understanding of the criteria being discussed, that is also (by definition) "Argument from authority" which is another fallacy. Keep in mind, that even if what you claim is true, that you do know more about logic than I do, that would irrelevant and fallacious to use as a basis for me to accept your assertion that ...

You just don't learn do you, I just debunked both your logical claims ( now the third) and you continue to name drop like Hollywood screen writer. Let me just keep debunking your fallacies until _YOU_GET_IT.

it is not an argument from authority, because guess what followed? me PROVING i know more about logical fallacies than you and I'm doing it again. it's like you don't quite understand these fallacies.

Finally If you claim that you've learned how to conduct yourself (your words), then show it.

Oh damn. here I was expecting an argument and yet you still don't deliver. How long do you want me to play testicular ping pong with your cocunuts? keep throwing out this logical fallacies, I'll gladly debunk them

So many things are off here, that I'm not going to respond to your comments any longer. Feel free to believe whatever you wish, and have a good life. Peace.

[Il Divo]

Prince Zeel wrote...


And another straggler comes up to bat. 

Yes, I do. Do you want to challenge me?

Substituting an insult for an argument is an ad hominem. 

Not quite. Let me outline the difference for you.

Name-calling:
You are an idiot.

Ad Hominem:
You are an idiot, ergo your argument is invalid.

The first instance involves me calling you an idiot. The second involves me using that personal characteristic (you being an idiot) to invalidate any arguments you put forth. In other words, it sidesteps your argument altogether, which is a fallacy in logic. Contrary to what you are imagining in that brain of yours, Phaelducan pointed out to you logical fallacies. He did not assert anything about you as a specific individual.

Modifié par Il Divo, 08 octobre 2011 - 12:27 .

[Phaelducan]

Il Divo wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Prince Zeel wrote...

is there a logical fallacy for not arguing your side and just yelling "LOGICAL FALLACY" Oh yes, its call and Ad hominem

Do you have any idea what an Ad Hominem even is?

That didn't bother me nearly as much as calling me an agnostic. 

Fair point, though I was thinking it's still a demonstration of his knowledge on logical fallacies (or lack of).

It isn't worth it. It's like Lotion Soronnar all over again. It just wastes everyone's time. Blocked, and moving on.

[Prince Zeel]

I find that to be inaccurate. The Hobbit by Tolkien was considered to be Fantasy as well as Children's literature. So were the Narnia books by Lewis. A sub genre of children's fantasy is still a work of fantasy and a work of children's lit. It is both. Mysteries? Look at Dean Koontz. "...He also frequently incorporates elements of horror[/i], science fiction, mystery, and satire."

What is amazing is that you think this is an argument. A book is either ONE, or BOTH, its not "NEITHER" or "Kind of" one.

I'm not a fan of the guy, buy right there is a perfect counter-example to your premise. He incorporates elements of ALL of those things. Many of his books are kind of romantic, kind of mysterious, kind of horrific, kind of satirical, and kind of science-fictiony. There are MANY inbetweens in genre's, which is why the term "hybrid" even applies to the discussion. Action-RPG, Stealth-Action, Tactical-Espionage, the list goes on and on. Your False Continuum is quite literally, false.

Still trying, huh?
If these books don't meet the standard premise of a "horror" or a "romance" or a "Mystery" then they do not get the label. They don't get a "kind of" label. The hybrid tag is something created because books or creations in general tend to blend many elements together. However, what doesn't happen, is a book claiming to be a Horror book when it doesn't have main horror elements. At best they can say this is a romance novel with some horror elements.
What bioware should be doing is This is an action game with RPG elements.

[ItsPhilsTime]

Phaelducan wrote...

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

Thats actually more of what were used to, before they were called RPG's now we know the ones we always know as RPG's are now know as Turn-Based RPG's, It has all the fundelments we use to in RPG's(ME1 at least) being able to customize almost everything and story, the whole 10 yards Role playing Story. All it is they broke it away and ME wasn't first to do it, I don't know what the first action RPG was but it was for computer and a few of my friends played it. But I fell in love with FF 12 when it came out cus of its style of play, to bad its old, and dont have a PS2 and not going to get it. lol.

Interesting point. Turn-based versus active was a pretty big shift in the JRPG genre. Final Fantasy 12 also added that whole AI component where you didn't need to really control 2/3 of the party. Fair to say that it was just as much of an RPG as FFIX or X? I would say yes, that the changes to the norm were not enough to remove it from the category.

Well 12 wasn't turn-based, it wasn't action but not next closest thing I think it was listed as the same as 7 & 8 Real-time RPG right. But when I first heard about it and you could only control 1 player at a time I didn't like how it sound, the only one I played like that before was Kingdom hearts but I did like it. To bad I was like halfway through the game and had to leave not one but two memory cards at the gaming area. Had left 3 there in total but the last 2 really counted cus they had my FF on them, other one was strictly my Sports game, if you remember or ever played sports games one memory card would be completely full by just saving one game LOL. that so sucked.

Yeah, thank god for built-in hard drives on consoles now. FF12 was the first RPG I ever played that literally played itself if you set your parameters a certain way. Certainly Oblivion, or even Quest for Glory in the old Sierra PC days could allow you do repetitive key-stroke your way to skill-ups, but FF12 could level your character for hours with the proper gambits.

I know for a fact that some people would argue that if you aren't even playing the game yet are advancing, it can't by definition be a role playing game, but I wouldn't make that argument. I think it's just another variation/innovation on the sub-genre. Liked by some, disliked probably by a few more, but no more or less relevant to the progression of the industry.

One of my friends played Every Quest I think it was it was for the PS2 and I didnt really care for it, I did how ever Love Diablo 1, 2 had a lot of problems though. But I like all of them, but if I go to turn-based I like the Vandal Hearts type best(Heard FF Tactics was a lot like Vandal Hearts), other then that I do like the action RPG now, but if it wasn't for story on ME I proble wouldn't like it. But DA I like battle System. Wild Arms was nice too but I liked the whole part it had where your characters had special ablities you had to use, like a bomb to blow up a big rock, graple to get to another side of the map stuff like that.

[Phaelducan]

Fiddles_stix wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Fiddles_stix wrote...

To be honest I don't think of ME1, 2 or 3 as RPGs, they have RPG elements but just because they're heavy on story I wouldn't call them RPGs.

I wouldn't even call DA:O or DA2 RPGs really, action RPGs maybe but I think there's a greater problem here of unnecessary labelling becoming coercive rather than constructive.

Hmm... I never thought story was a primary component of an RPG. See Dark Souls. Minimal story, heavy role-playing elements. 

Perhaps all labeling is unnecessary... but we humans sure love to label everything. That's why we have so many signs everywhere. 

As to the hybrid issue, I'm trying to remember back to the old NES strategy guide that came with the first console pack-in WAY back when. I think there were several "action-rpg" games listed, such as Rygar, even back in the 80's. It isn't a new concept that there are hybrids within the genre.

I was thinking coercion in terms of todays market that as it always has been about chrunching the numbers with greater competition within the industry, just in terms of volume, the genre constraints and coercive affects of labelling stiffle innovation.

Perhaps I'm looking at it with nostalgia though and wanting to believe that previous eras were more innovative.

I think it's fair to say that innovation gets more difficult the longer an industry is around. That isn't to make excuses and say that we won't see innovation any more, but I do believe it is harder and will become more rare over time. Production costs alone make a game like Torment unlikely to be created again (though from casual observation Kingdoms of Amalur is going to try). 

Also, many of the tropes and mores of gaming are very well established and have an ironclad track-record. Mario always sells like crazy, because jumping on goombas works. Hence, we don't see a lot of variation in a Mario game any longer. I agree that nostalgia is a powerful emotional force in video games because 1) most of us started gaming as kids and the memories are inherently richer and more intense and 2) the games were original then.

The good news is that gog.com always has something awesome for a few bucks, and even AAA developers know not to ignore their roots most of the time (excepting Silicon Knights, those poor bastards).

[Prince Zeel]

Il Divo wrote...

Prince Zeel wrote...


And another straggler comes up to bat. 

Yes, I do. Do you want to challenge me?

Substituting an insult for an argument is an ad hominem. 

Not quite. Let me outline the difference for you.

Name-calling:
You are an idiot.

Ad Hominem:
You are an idiot, ergo your argument is invalid.

The first instance involves me calling you an idiot. The second involves me using that personal characteristic (you being an idiot) to invalidate any arguments you put forth. In other words, it sidesteps your argument altogether, which is a fallacy in logic. Contrary to what you are imagining in that brain of yours, Phaelducan pointed out to you logical fallacies. He did not assert anything about you as a specific individual.

There are more ways than one to commit an ad hominem. We have your very simplistic way and then we have the Phaelducan way. and i've seen it before. Logical fallacy drop like its their birthday and instead of backing up their argument (which he didn't) they consider their post FINISHO. This is, what we call the insult over argument.


Let me simplfy this further, he was attacking _ME_ or my LOGICAL thinking instead of addressing my point. Like i pointed out before, its a very passive way of being a dick. I do not take kindly to it.

[Prince Zeel]

Phaelducan wrote...


It isn't worth it. It's like Lotion Soronnar all over again. It just wastes everyone's time. Blocked, and moving on.

If he was interested in arguing his side he should of done it from the start. instead of me pushing him to it. Now he's doing the same ole' dance. THIS GUY IS MEAN!!!! SO I DONT NEED TO REFUTE HIS ARGUMENT.

Block me then.

[Phaelducan]

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

ItsPhilsTime wrote...

Thats actually more of what were used to, before they were called RPG's now we know the ones we always know as RPG's are now know as Turn-Based RPG's, It has all the fundelments we use to in RPG's(ME1 at least) being able to customize almost everything and story, the whole 10 yards Role playing Story. All it is they broke it away and ME wasn't first to do it, I don't know what the first action RPG was but it was for computer and a few of my friends played it. But I fell in love with FF 12 when it came out cus of its style of play, to bad its old, and dont have a PS2 and not going to get it. lol.

Interesting point. Turn-based versus active was a pretty big shift in the JRPG genre. Final Fantasy 12 also added that whole AI component where you didn't need to really control 2/3 of the party. Fair to say that it was just as much of an RPG as FFIX or X? I would say yes, that the changes to the norm were not enough to remove it from the category.

Well 12 wasn't turn-based, it wasn't action but not next closest thing I think it was listed as the same as 7 & 8 Real-time RPG right. But when I first heard about it and you could only control 1 player at a time I didn't like how it sound, the only one I played like that before was Kingdom hearts but I did like it. To bad I was like halfway through the game and had to leave not one but two memory cards at the gaming area. Had left 3 there in total but the last 2 really counted cus they had my FF on them, other one was strictly my Sports game, if you remember or ever played sports games one memory card would be completely full by just saving one game LOL. that so sucked.

Yeah, thank god for built-in hard drives on consoles now. FF12 was the first RPG I ever played that literally played itself if you set your parameters a certain way. Certainly Oblivion, or even Quest for Glory in the old Sierra PC days could allow you do repetitive key-stroke your way to skill-ups, but FF12 could level your character for hours with the proper gambits.

I know for a fact that some people would argue that if you aren't even playing the game yet are advancing, it can't by definition be a role playing game, but I wouldn't make that argument. I think it's just another variation/innovation on the sub-genre. Liked by some, disliked probably by a few more, but no more or less relevant to the progression of the industry.

One of my friends played Every Quest I think it was it was for the PS2 and I didnt really care for it, I did how ever Love Diablo 1, 2 had a lot of problems though. But I like all of them, but if I go to turn-based I like the Vandal Hearts type best(Heard FF Tactics was a lot like Vandal Hearts), other then that I do like the action RPG now, but if it wasn't for story on ME I proble wouldn't like it. But DA I like battle System. Wild Arms was nice too but I liked the whole part it had where your characters had special ablities you had to use, like a bomb to blow up a big rock, graple to get to another side of the map stuff like that.

Funny that you mention Vandal Hearts. I loved that game, but only reason I picked it up was because it was Konami, and the Suikoden RPG series is my all-time favorite... at least RPGs but maybe overall. Pity Suikoden tactics wasn't very good. JRPG arguments are just as pointless as the Western ones though. I used to think that Suikoden was superior to FF just because you had 108 characters in each one and had a hub-upgrading system to go with the mini-games and stuff. 

I also didn't used to like the Elder Scrolls games because I hated not having a better idea of what to do and where to go. Now I love that part of what Bethesda does. Shrug, tastes change I guess.

[Il Divo]

Prince Zeel wrote...

There are more ways than one to commit an ad hominem. We have your very simplistic way and then we have the Phaelducan way. and i've seen it before. Logical fallacy drop like its their birthday and instead of backing up their argument (which he didn't) they consider their post FINISHO. This is, what we call the insult over argument.

Let me simplfy this further, he was attacking _ME_ or my LOGICAL thinking instead of addressing my point. Like i pointed out before, its a very passive way of being a dick. I do not take kindly to it.

It's not an ad hominem, yet again. Demonstrate where he used some characteristic specific to you as a human being to invalidate anything you say. You're claiming, "Hey! He said I'm committing a logical fallacy! AD HOMINEM!". He doesn't find your thinking logical, ergo he attacked your logic. Arguments are funnny like that.

[Blooddrunk1004]

Zeel please STFU, because of your trolling every thread will get locked.