Rate Human Revolution vs. other LGS-inspired franchise games - by heywood
Pyrian on 12/12/2011 at 17:53
Quote Posted by Thirith
The notion of a 'pure' (C)RPG where "only your character matters" is a fallacy.
Well, it certainly ceases to be roll-playing at that point, as you're basically just unleashing your creation and seeing how it does. There's no particular reason why such a thing couldn't exist, and indeed several existing games are distinctly similar: Facebook games where they've kept character development but reduced questing to "click here"; the old "tank-programming" games where you create an AI tank and have it battle other tanks; and so on.
It would be interesting to have a "Advice from the Matron" game where the hero comes to you each year for instructions in how to train for his challenges, and then comes back to tell you how it went and get more advice.
But generally speaking, people want to
play their creations, even in the most building-centric games. Consider the defense genre. Any of those games could be made such that you simply create your defenses and see if they survive - but in practice the games tend to involve the player at all times, instead, and of course that's generally more fun.
Papy on 13/12/2011 at 10:06
Quote Posted by Pyrian
Well, it certainly ceases to be roll-playing at that point
You mean... RPGs are like homeopathy?
(BTW, even though I doubt anyone will find my joke funny, I completely agree with you)
Thirith on 13/12/2011 at 13:18
@Pyrian: this is off-topic, but are there any good current versions of the "program your own AI and test it against others!" genre? I only remember ancient games that did this, and I've always been curious about them.
Apart from that, I fully agree with you.
Renzatic on 15/12/2011 at 19:18
Quote Posted by Thirith
@Pyrian: this is off-topic, but are there any good current versions of the "program your own AI and test it against others!" genre? I only remember ancient games that did this, and I've always been curious about them.
I'm not Pyrian, and I can't think of any recent examples, but have you tried Carnage Heart for the PS1? I remember it being a fairly indepth example of the genre.
Al_B on 15/12/2011 at 22:19
A good start may be to look at (
http://www.aiforge.net/) AIForge. It's a few years old but not ancient and has about a thousand links to various AI programming games.
Koki on 16/12/2011 at 07:25
Quote Posted by Thirith
The notion of a 'pure' (C)RPG where "only your character matters" is a fallacy.
So what the fuck is your problem then? That I should've said "your character matters in 99%" instead of "only your character matters"? Go to previous page, Ctrl+A, paste into Wordpad, press Edit, Replace and knock yourself out.
If this is "IT CAN'T BE DONE PERFECTLY SO WHY BOTHER TRYING TO DO IT AT ALL IN ANY AMOUNT" then you're killing babies again. Cars can also never be made perfectly safe and it doesn't stop people from putting things like seatbelts or airbags in them.
Oh, and:
Inline Image:
http://fryeblog.blog.lib.mcmaster.ca/files/2009/10/ad-hominem.gif:cool:
Thirith on 16/12/2011 at 07:52
Quote Posted by Koki
So what the fuck is your problem then? That I should've said "your character matters in 99%" instead of "only your character matters"? Go to previous page, Ctrl+A, paste into Wordpad, press Edit, Replace and knock yourself out.
If this is "IT CAN'T BE DONE PERFECTLY SO WHY BOTHER TRYING TO DO IT AT ALL IN ANY AMOUNT" then you're killing babies again. Cars can also never be made perfectly safe and it doesn't stop people from putting things like seatbelts or airbags in them.
Koki, try reading what others write, rather than just cherrypicking sentences. What I said is this: old-school RPGs are
just as reliant on player skills. The difference is the skill set they require: strategy/tactics as opposed to twitch skills. The difference is that strategy is more of a high-level, abstract skill, but the argument I was opposing is based on a supposed truth that simply doesn't hold up to closer scrutiny. If anything, the argument should be that the RPGs that CRPGs are based on have a more heavy emphasis on strategy, and that old-school CRPGs are closer to what they originated from in that respect - but I've seen as much roleplaying (D&D and otherwise) that is closer to something like, say,
Quest for Glory (i.e. adventure with stats) than to the turn-based gameplay of
Pools of Radiance.
Koki on 16/12/2011 at 10:38
Quote Posted by Thirith
Koki, try reading what others write, rather than just cherrypicking sentences. What I said is this: old-school RPGs are
just as reliant on player skills. The difference is the skill set they require: strategy/tactics as opposed to twitch skills. The difference is that strategy is more of a high-level, abstract skill, but the argument I was opposing is based on a supposed truth that simply doesn't hold up to closer scrutiny.
No, the difference is that "high-level, abstract skill" i.e.
having half a brain is something that
cannot be removed from the game. You can't play a character smarter than you are. Sucks, I know, but it's true for both computer and pen and paper RPGs. And hell, all games ever. Twitch-skills
can be removed and represented entirely by game mechanics. Which is exactly what pen and paper RPGs do. And which is exactly what games calling themselves RPGs should strive for(mah boi).
I don't really care what RPGs originated as. I'm not going to say that Akalabeth is a pinnacle of cRPGs or that any cRPG that isn't a dungeon crawler is a piece of shit for immersionfags. I'm not from the Codex. I don't care.
Briareos H on 16/12/2011 at 11:03
Quote Posted by Koki
something that
cannot be removed from the gameIt's even the core of the game, and the reason why people play it. Traditional RPGs and cRPGs abstracted everything else so that the player could concentrate on those high-level decisions, because that was exactly what they
sought in the concept of a RPG. In that sense, such games are as pure as they get and it's not a fallacy.
Arguing whether adding secondary elements that require different skills from the player (twitch, adventure, whatever) detracts from the main goal of a RPG is a different debate best left to analysis on a point by point basis. In that case, a minigame which sucks.
yeah I guess I'm a bit paraphrasing here
Papy on 16/12/2011 at 13:45
Quote Posted by Briareos H
It's even the core of the game, and the reason why people play it.
I'll play devil's advocate and say that it is not true for everyone. For some people, an RPG is more like an acting game. It is not about making decision, it is simply about imitating someone else.
