Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
Beren wrote:Personally, I'm waiting (and experimenting myself, but that's top secret) for someone to write a game where your citizens build for themselves, given the right economic conditions. Even minor government buildings, like post offices and revenue agencies should appear automatically as long as enough money is budgeted for them. Is it hard to imagine a bank and a supermarket and a factory being built in the same year? Of course not!
You know, there are people who love micromanagement. After all, these games are all about management, the player should be in control. Or do you expect armies fight for you, because some AI generals are issuing orders? Automation is not the solution.
What I see as the problem is when management becomes too complex and diverse to a point where it's no longer fun. The line between fun and boring is very thin. I also think automated stuff is usually bad. If a player can't or wouldn't want to control something instead leaving it for the AI, then why include that stuff in the game? I find the simplest games most addictive. Why go through lots of screens and windows instead of managing everything with sliders? Do we need to have every real-life thing included? I mean, it's only a game. I'd rather play something more simpler and 'unrealistic' than a real-life simulation.
Demand drives all economic activity. It is why the US cannot win the war on drugs, it is why the Berlin wall came down. It cannot be controlled -- it is merely the whim of the consumer.
In a free market, there is no restriction on supply, and people are able to trade freely to satisfy their demands. In a controlled market, where supply is restricted, black markets open up, and people get what they need that way.
In Civ3, AC, MOO2 the player controls all aspects of the economy, rather inefficiently. All I want is a game where I am able to leave it up to a truly free market, which is the most efficient anyway. This gives me freedom to worry about my armies and navies, my enemies, and other matters of state. Does anyone really care what their subjects are doing, as long as they're happy?
Demand drives all economic activity. It is why the US cannot win the war on drugs, it is why the Berlin wall came down. It cannot be controlled -- it is merely the whim of the consumer.
In a free market, there is no restriction on supply, and people are able to trade freely to satisfy their demands. In a controlled market, where supply is restricted, black markets open up, and people get what they need that way.
In Civ3, AC, MOO2 the player controls all aspects of the economy, rather inefficiently. All I want is a game where I am able to leave it up to a truly free market, which is the most efficient anyway. This gives me freedom to worry about my armies and navies, my enemies, and other matters of state. Does anyone really care what their subjects are doing, as long as they're happy?
The line between fun and boring is indeed thin. But when in eg. Alpha Centauri, at the beginning with a few cities you want to do everything yourself as it's not in such a great scale yet. But when the game starts to near it's end, you would just waste tons of time doing something that doesn't really have that much affect in the end. In that point the little details are better left to the AI and concentrate yourself on winning the game.
- May the blood of thine enemies stain the ground -
i used to cheat all the time... but then i realized that i SUCKED at video games. so i set out to beat all my games Legit, and i Did! now i am like 100x better than before. also, thats why i like FPS games on the internet, cause then i can own all those fags who have been relying on cheats in SP mode that you cant use in MP mode, and they suck... boy is that sweet?
also, my friend cheats too and i tell him not to, cause that just prolongs your craptasticness
Cheating can be incredibly lame, but I agree with all of the people who mentioned that they use it to see parts of the game they never would have otherwise.
Isn't saving before a battle or a steal or an encounter with an NPC technically cheating? I know the Fallout manuals encourage it - but if people are getting on their high horse and claiming that cheating is the root of all evil, etc. - then I would ask them to try to complete the game without a crutch like saving a lot.
Also - if I exploit a bug in the system - say stealing from an NPC that has an endless supply of money due to an error in the game - how is that different than fireing up a character editor and just typing in a large amount of money?
I know you are "beating" the game by finding the error, but the same result happens.
Fallout 1 & 2 are relatively challenging games - and if someone can complete them without a) getting a hint or two from a walkthrough or a friend or b) without saving a lot then my hat is off to them.
mrhandy 2.0 wrote:Isn't saving before a battle or a steal or an encounter with an NPC technically cheating?
In an RPG, most definately yes. If you rely on saving rather than wits and skill to do such a thing, then you're hardly role-playing, are you? In both Fallouts, I tried to avoid doing anything of that sort.
suppose you're thinking about a plate of shrimp. suddenly somebody will say like 'plate' or 'shrimp' or 'plate of shrimp', out of the blue, no explanation.
I used FALCHE and FLACHE2 so I could play through both games and see what I was actually supposed to do without getting killed every few steps. I did this several times with Fallout, and when I'd gotten a general idea of what the crap I was supposed to do, I play through the game legit.
This also let me see what all quests were in the game. Not so much cheating, as it was an interactive walkthrough.
i usually beat things legit first, and then reward myself for beating it by cheating the second (or third) time and getting all that i missed or could not obtain.
If I have the option of going straight to the next area, or spending 3 hours leveling, then going to the next area, i'll cheat and spend the 3 hours I save doing something fun. It's not like leveling is fun.
The only lame part is bragging about your cheated character to someone who has a legit one.
Has anyone thought that ,take me for example, when i first play a game i dont use cheats until i beat it. After that if the game really intrested me like the best game in the world (its hard to chose between fallout 1,2, or tactics) then i go through it again using cheats like char edit and strategy guides. Speaking of, how many of u out there that say cheating is lame use strategy guides or post help me messages sayin ur stuck. If ur one of those ppl then u just really insulted urself bad buddy. Cuz being lame at gaming is really bad.
Plus what business of it is yours if a person cheats in a single player game. I understand cheating boasters are bastards (they should die jk) but those who cheat at games and keep quiet is nun of ur damn business. Plus its just a frikin game (Even though Fallout series are teh best). U have no right to tell them that they shouldnt cheat. Its not capitilism. They bought it its just a game. Let them do with it as tehy please. How does it affect u if they cheat. U have the honor of saying that at least for the first time through u played it without cheating or using a strategy guide or outside help. So the next time some cheating boaster says hes better, just pop him in the face. But otherwise if they dont shoot of thier mouths then keep urs shut. Otherwise ur as annoying as the cheatin boasters. Plus its only a game its not like its a war or sumtin.
I first beat game legally, then I usually check all the Walkthroughs/Tips I can find, and finally, I usually cheat. This way I have more fun... so - cheating - yes, but after completing the game, and NOT in the multiplayer - Cheating in MP is just lame and there's no excuse.
BTW... did anyone noticed that Falche2... cheats?(LoL) I mean, when you build your character with End at 4, and then you use Falche to get End to 10, you will still get only 4 points to HP when you level up! Or it's just me?
I generally shy away from cheating (Like gang-wars, gunfights, WWII, and the like). It just totally ruins games. I once played "Starcraft" with cheats, and it sucked. The ONLY time I cheat (Technically) is in FO2. I change all 10mm to 9mm, and the HK P90c to FN p90. I also give my chars 3x Night vision perks (My monitor blows, I can barely see with everything turned all the way up.) but it balances out, 'cause I don’t get my first 3 perks in-game. Bottom line: Cheating due to lack of skill is gay. You won't get anny better by doing so.
NOTE: Soldier87, take some more time to type your posts; dont use w/, urself, and cuz. It's an invitation to flaming.
KillaKilla's logic:
FOT and FO: BOS weren't FO at all!........... 1. I am nobody
DOGMEAT is God. Never dispute this!........ 2. Nobody is perfect
Up and coming hardware nerd.................. 3. Hence I am perfect
I see the problem with cheating, the first time i had this game my cousin was at my house. Anyway, he started a character and had Falche and the inventory editor, so he edited his character and basically cut through navarro like a hot knife through butter.
I see now the problem with that, i basically sat back and watched him beat horrigan and watched the whole Enclave oil rig etc etc. Pretty much seeing the whole ending and going o_O as i sat back and watched. In some games mild cheating is needed to compete. In Command and Conquer Tiberian sun the computer has fast building and pretty much infinite money, although it had only 1 difficulty setting(very little offense, sent in waves) those bonuses made it hard to beat as it spread it's base to large areas and cloaked it.
