lackblogger
SasqWatch
- Joined
- November 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,778
This thread is just…. wow.
Wow maaaaan, like people are, like, talking to each other WITH WORDS AND STUFF, maaaan, like whoaaaaaaaaa.
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,778
This thread is just…. wow.
Again no complaint.
Just the remark on this BG feature and how self proclaimed old school gamers state they strive to conserve old school gaming.
Improving on a feature is also not copying it.
Most importantly, nowhere written that products must be their own things.
The original point was certain features can not be because players do not like them
Of course it is. That is the purpose of attributing to people words they have not said.
When reading testimonies of rapists, school killers and stuff, it appears they often desire their victims to resist a bit, they desire them to cower in fear, kick, try to get away. It adds to their enjoyment. What they do not want is getting frustrated by a victim that would knock them out, flee successfully…
That is the spirit.
Abstracting, averaging… On a site that screams about Oblivion being voiced over by four actors, on a site that is bent on storytolding…
Here's a case of abstracting, averaging: make all NPCs coloured androgynous NPCs because meeting hundreds of NPCs. Races and genders abstracted and averaged in one and only NPC.
Neo Scavenger
What’s the problem? Don’t like all the WORDS AND STUFF?
We should put tariffs on any RtwP/Turn based Rpgs.
Oh dear, you really are embarassing yourself aren't you…
Puzzling.Abstracting is not averaging. Non-one has either said or implied that, that is something you've plucked out of thin air as yet another example of you're incessant desire to write complete crap at people.
Zero complaint. Far from it.In reply to being asked why you're complaining that a game is both different and exactly the same, you replied with:
If the original game is BG, the feature was known and quoted on this site numerous times as an example of players' dedication to old school gaming.Initially you did not know that the original game had the mechanic that the new one supposedly doesn't, and yet you bulled into the conversation because you spied the opportunity to talk crap at someone. After realising the initial point was factually incorrect you are now using this new information to make a different attack. If it's not a complaint, why attack?
No. Each person is responsible for one's own words. The original point was about the causes that lead to the lack of mentioned features.A remark is it? A remark you made up on the spot a couple of hours ago because you felt stupid in an internet discussion? The "Original point" was some moron complaining that BG didn't have fleeing mechanics even though BG had fleeing mechanics.
Already answered.When you say "improving" you don't actually confer any point. You could say "improving" to a gazillion little details in any RPG ever. Just because something exists it doesn't automatically follow that it can be "improved", nor that it should be, nor in what direction and by what method the so-called "improvements" should take.
Drifting again. It is about enemy behaviours.You could "improve" the variety of swords in a game: Just like all those military weaponry nerds always demand. What's the result of that "improvement"? Messier itemisation, confusing itemisation, lots more development time for barely any gameplay benefit,
Neo Scavenger was light on artwork. One artwork by type of enemy for example.increased artwork load,
Can anyone translate this please?
They are detrimental to players who seek to dominate, to prevail. It is bad design in their case and not benefitial at all.
Lately, a school shooter recounted how he got that sense of excitement seeing people cowering in fear, begging for their life, trying to defend themselves helpless by throwing punches in the air and how he got frustrated by people who managed evasion, blaming them for acting that way. That ruined his fun.
That is the same spirit. It serves no purpose to feed players who want to conquer, to dominate, to prevail enemies that make those players feel insecure because the enemies might be able to flee,might be able to turn the tables on the PC.
Those enemies are meant to be conquered. They must resist just enough to give that sense of excitment but certainly not to make a player feel insecure.
That is the main reason why devs must be very careful when they implement enemy behaviours. The core of the original point.
Drifting again. It is about enemy behaviours.
All examples taken from Neo Scavenger might be seen as benefitial by gamers.
Neo Scavenger was light on artwork. One artwork by type of enemy for example.
Despite this, and thanks to enemy behaviours, a thug (represented by the same artwork) coud be different from other thugs because it behaves differently from the common thug, it could be tougher, cockier, more persisting etc
Characterization through gameplay, same artwork, no visual differences, differences by the way they act and behave.
Puzzling.
Abstraction can be managed through averaging.
Weird stuff to state as it has grown so common: the reign of the middle class has led to the abstraction of a citizen, the average person.
Nevertheless, the kind of abstraction of people race, gender was not cheered.