Feargus speaks the bad talk again

axelgreese · Post by **axelgreese** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 5:10 am

Red wrote:Now THAT reminds me there was a show in my town 2 years ago with the older Alfred Hitchcock movies with live piano.

Lucky scumbag...

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 5:43 am

SuperH wrote:The argument between 2d and 3d graphics is exatly the same as the argument between silent movies and talkies. Back when sound first became available for movies, the movies with it sucked, for a number of reasons.

Yes, you're right and this is an excellent analogy. One of the reasons that first couple of waves of "talkies" sucked was that their makers were no longer focusing on the tried-and-true techniques of lighting, etc., but became obsessed with the sound itself. I can't remember the name of the movie, but I sat through one of the first "talkies" once where the characters essentially stood around and talked, and talked and talked. Occassionally one of the characters would do something like push a guard from a ledge and you would be treated to a blood curdling scream. Oh boy. What a treat...

Basically, what sound in movies gave movie-goers at first was really nothing more than sound-for-sound's-sake, just like 3D often ends up as eye-candy-for-eye-candy's sake. Thankfully the industry eventually outgrew it. I hope that the gaming industry can do the same w/3D, since they seem bent on going down that road.

OTB

EvoG · Post by **EvoG** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 5:47 am

Such an arrogant tone, not good not good...

Hardly arrogant...just so tired of hearing people criticize how much everything else sucks yet make no effort whatsoever to be constructive and tell us all 'how to do it right'.

"Oooh, I'm the game player, the consumer, so therefore everything I say is right." I've heard such shit being spouted on a plethora of forums from these people telling us how these games are made and why they suck. Their knowledge of even the technology they bust on is ridiculously lacking in ANY sort of knowledge.

Your initial retort was just that, a retort...you presented yourself in a position of having any relevance to your knowledge of game development by mocking my sentence structure. I could argue thats arrogant. I could argue that a lot of what you say to me or others is condescending, a subset of arrogance.

Its too easy to criticize. When someone is wrong, its too easy for them to antagonize others and try to elevate themselves righteously above the those. Please...give me a break.

If you know "how to do it right"...if you're so learned...you're so enlightened and well read, then start right now, a brand new thread, and lets discuss constructively how the industry, at least as far as RPG's are concerned, should start doing to improve the quality of the games they make. Feel free to post great story ideas. Dialog trees. Skill implementation. Combat ( thats such a big fucking issue with people...THEN MAKE IT BETTER ). Ethics. Story branching. Non-linearity. Cut scenes. Emotional pull. Economy. Game balance. Lets see what happens when we actually respect others opinions, listen, learn and grow. What happens when we put all these 'great minds' together and actually gain something of value.

All this criticism...negativity...its all bullshit and fruitless. Who the fuck cares who's more right. All this time since I started on this forum, I've asked questions that I hoped would elicit constructive responses but instead....for the most part...short of a few really well thought out replies...its been "RT fucking suXors...I'm L337" or "3D engines fucking suXors...I'm so fucking 733T" then...thread turns into an OT bashfest. So much for seemingly intelligent people discussing game developement rather than who's more right and why everyone else is a stupid fuck because they don't have the same tastes or opine the same way.

If all you people want is Fallout over and over and over again, same gameplay, same graphics, same size on your harddrive, different story, then I don't know what to tell you. If you're interested in evolving the CRPG genre and make it more fun...great, awesome...if you want to talk about how wrong everyone is and they're pussies and stupid and dumb, if it isn't the EXACT way you want it or JUST LIKE FALLOUT, then thats sad, and any of these discussions will go nowhere.

I'm still happy!

Honey Nut Cheerios

Red · Post by **Red** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 5:57 am

I just wanted to take this time to remind everyone of THE BLOB's ending: he's dropped into the antartic so he stays frozen there.

SO LETS NOT MELT THE ICECAPS BY BREAKING UP THE OZONE OR THE BLOB WILL GET US ALL.

K? TNX BYE!

OnTheBounce · Post by **OnTheBounce** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 5:59 am

EvoG wrote:Hardly arrogant...just so tired of hearing people criticize how much everything else sucks yet make no effort whatsoever to be constructive and tell us all 'how to do it right'.

Okay, I'll say something constructive.

Basically the problem w/many games is that their focus is graphics and glitz, rather than interesting settings, plot, etc.

For all I care a RPG can have the same graphical qualities as FO/FO2 from now 'til Doomsday as long as the setting, characters, etc., are up to snuff, it just doesn't matter.

Concentrate on plot, setting and characters and then worry about how it all will look onscreen, whether or not you'll be able to tilt the camera, etc. Tailor your graphics to the storyline, not vice-versa and everything will be fine.

I don't care if there is so much detail in a world that I can see that someone left a glass of water sitting out and there are mineral deposits on it following evaporation as well as a pubic hair floating in what's left of the water. That sort of thing is nifty for about five seconds, then it's old hat, if it's done just for the sake of doing it. But if it somehow enhances the world -- and immersion doesn't rely on graphics or we wouldn't have all of the rabid FO fans that we do -- then its okay. Otherwise its just an distraction from the real focus of the game, which in a RPG is story, plot, the milieu and sitting down to play a character.

Essentially, the aim of evolution in the RPG genre should be on making an interactive work of literature. So any advancements should be more likely to come from technical applications that add to an interactive world, and not from making the world look better.

Cheers,

OTB

axelgreese · Post by **axelgreese** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 6:11 am

EvoG wrote:
Such an arrogant tone, not good not good...
Hardly arrogant...just so tired of hearing people criticize how much everything else sucks yet make no effort whatsoever to be constructive and tell us all 'how to do it right'.

I have told you what I want and what I dont' want, the rest I"m gonna trust to you.

And I'm terriably sorry if I take what you said (which was basically "listen little boy, I'm older and wiser so run on home") as an arrogant tone.

"Oooh, I'm the game player, the consumer, so therefore everything I say is right." I've heard such shit being spouted on a plethora of forums from these people telling us how these games are made and why they suck. Their knowledge of even the technology they bust on is ridiculously lacking in ANY sort of knowledge.

Yeah sucks doesn't it? You go to all that work to make a game and they just don't relise how great it is! The nerve! Can't they recongnize the art! The balance! The wonderful story!! Oh wait they're the ignorant masses they're supposed to be dumb.

I know what I like and I know what I don't like, I"m sorry if I don't like and dislike what you want me to like and dislike.

Your initial retort was just that, a retort...you presented yourself in a position of having any relevance to your knowledge of game development by mocking my sentence structure.

Man I stirred up something wicked! woohoo!

I could argue thats arrogant. I could argue that a lot of what you say to me or others is condescending, a subset of arrogance.

But with me that's a given so why bother?

Its too easy to criticize.

I love the easy criticizer, victim, rapee, etc etc...

[qutoe] When someone is wrong, its too easy for them to antagonize others and try to elevate themselves righteously above the those. Please...give me a break. [/quote]

oh cry me a river and build me a bridge!! hehe

If you know "how to do it right"...if you're so learned...you're so enlightened and well read, then start right now, a brand new thread, and lets discuss constructively how the industry, at least as far as RPG's are concerned, should start doing to improve the quality of the games they make. Feel free to post great story ideas. Dialog trees. Skill implementation. Combat ( thats such a big fucking issue with people...THEN MAKE IT BETTER ). Ethics. Story branching. Non-linearity. Cut scenes. Emotional pull. Economy. Game balance. Lets see what happens when we actually respect others opinions, listen, learn and grow. What happens when we put all these 'great minds' together and actually gain something of value.

ehh sounds like a lot work :(.. I might do it but if i did I'd do it at the 'codex. That's be the ideal place to discuss such things. But I just might have to do that, it'd take some time though.

All this criticism...negativity...its all bullshit and fruitless.

But it's ever so much fun!

Who the fuck cares who's more right.

Well me of course!

All this time since I started on this forum, I've asked questions that I hoped would elicit constructive responses but instead....for the most part...short of a few really well thought out replies...its been "RT fucking suXors...I'm L337" or "3D engines fucking suXors...I'm so fucking 733T" then...thread turns into an OT bashfest. So much for seemingly intelligent people discussing game developement rather than who's more right and why everyone else is a stupid fuck because they don't have the same tastes or opine the same way.

And that in essance is a forum.

If all you people want is Fallout over and over and over again, same gameplay, same graphics, same size on your harddrive, different story, then I don't know what to tell you.

I don't, I'm with Mad Max on this one, thought that way for a while. I consider the FO universe soiled and I want something new(psst that's where you come in)

If you're interested in evolving the CRPG genre

I'm not, that's your job. I'm just interesting in what's fun.

and make it more fun...great, awesome...if you want to talk about how wrong everyone is and they're pussies and stupid and dumb, if it isn't the EXACT way you want it or JUST LIKE FALLOUT, then thats sad, and any of these discussions will go nowhere.

I don't. I dont' even want FO3. But I do want many of the same qualities that FO had, games today just don't have'em. And the future don't look so good either. I mean I got into pc gaming with real time statagy, I love 3D graphics. I've got nothing against them what so ever, but , but for some odd reason I dont' like them in my rpgs. Other people like that, and great let them have that, but let me have my fun too. I think Mr. Cain has a good idea with the hi-res backgrounds and 3d models, but until I see it I'm of the opinion that 2d is the way to go. And for some other odd I perfer TB combat in my rpgs, no really good reason either, that's just what I perfer. Especially if you incorporate ranged weapons in the gameplay, I dont' want a click fest and real time ranged weapons are hard to implement effectivly.

I'm still happy!

Honey Nut Cheerios

That's the spirt!!

Woohoo! OTB way to go! numba 1 numba1 woo woo!!

Red · Post by **Red** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 6:35 am

Basically implimentation of the engine doesn't matter much. There's two main things which are important: the contents and the interface. If you can't handle the interface to access the contents properly, then the content's useless.

I very well know that you need the graphics (and memory managment and sound and file management etc...) engine to have even the simplest of things working however I think that often people often overlook the interface.

There's (quite?) a few games out there which get the interface (reasonably) right, but I'd say that most which do lack any interesting content...

Rosh · Post by **Rosh** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 2:25 pm

A good, current example.

Asheron's Call 2. Absolute shit gameplay, zero content, and piss-poor support.

Oh, but it's by far the most graphically-pleasing MMORPG out on the market.

I wonder why the per-server numbers barely go into the 4 digits, and often go into the double digits. After all, it's nice 3d and purdy skeleton animations and everything that people should want, as according to some.

Mr Carrot · Post by **Mr Carrot** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 3:23 pm

Turn based is critical because it means that the combat is dictated by your characters attributes not how first YOU can click the fucking mouse. Hence RPG you have to RP you character.

SuperH · Post by **SuperH** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 3:49 pm

Real time doesnt have to be frentic mouse clicking, it just always has been in the past. I know i can think right now of some slightly different and more interesting ways of doing it... of course all the different aspects of your attacks need to be dicated by your stats, eg the speed of the attack and the strength and chance to hit. But instead of frentic clicking, why not just pause the game, set an attack style, suck as aim for the eyes or groin or burst shot, and then select the enemy or enemy's you want to go after and let the character go. Plenty of time to plan, and then you get the entire battle acted out in real time, until you want to change strategies and you just change what you have set. Thats not a frentic click fest, and i think it would work rather well.

Red · Post by **Red** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 4:29 pm

If you prep up for a fight and then just bring him into it and basically do nothing (execpt maybe pause ot heal the stupid AI which can't do it itself), then you might as well watch a screensaver.

In fact that's what I found dungeon seige was good at: be a screensaver, if only it oculd be set to explore automatically you wouldn't need to do anything really.

Otherwise it's a variant of the clickfest: the pausefest, where you either need to pause every few seconds to make decisions (or timed), or you have it set to pause after specific events - and usually guess what that event is? Pause when your health is low and you need to heal.

Hmm, how interesting... both amount to the same except one doesn't "feature the pause function".

In real time you just HAVE to make every decision. Simple as that, so you roleplay every step of it without anything automatic. In fact putting anything autmatic just makes the game less role-playable (Isn't the point of a role playing game for YOU to role play, not the computer?).

That's not to say you shouldn't allow the user to do things automatically if he wishes - quite the opposite in fact as this would just slow down gameplay needlessly for those who might not be interested in such control (which is rather frequent).

Doyle · Post by **Doyle** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 4:30 pm

Jesus Christ, payne, can you take a fucking clue? This guy doesn't want anymore of your bullshit, since you'd rather play stupid games than discuss anything relevant.

SuperH · Post by **SuperH** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 4:48 pm

Well, whatever, i was only making an example. Real-time doesnt have to be done as a click fest. The thing is, if you make a game real time, it relies on YOUR personal skills and not the character, because in real time its only you unless you let the computer do it for you. I dont really think any of us here could shoot a super mutant in the eyes from 50 feet away with a plasma rifle in real life, so of course real-time couldn't be accurate. If using real time, you have to either let the computer handle it or use some skill that the people playing DO have, like speed of mouse clicking.

Mr Carrot · Post by **Mr Carrot** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 7:34 pm

if your going to add pause then its just the bastard child of rt or tb and its not as good as either.

axelgreese · Post by **axelgreese** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 7:57 pm

Doyle wrote:Jesus Christ, payne, can you take a fucking clue? This guy doesn't want anymore of your bullshit, since you'd rather play stupid games than discuss anything relevant.

I was just havein' a bit fun.

Post by **DarkUnderlord** » Sat Feb 22, 2003 11:54 pm

The bad guys are tougher in TB games too... Ever notice that? Play X-Com, spend your turn moving all your men outside of your ship. In the aliens next turn, 2 or 3 aliens can one shot your eight men to death.

You don't get that in real-time.

In Fallout, a mutant with a minigun can fire at you, causing 400+ hit points damage and kill you outright.

You don't get that in real-time.

In real-time, you have set "whack amounts". A certain bad guys takes "5 shots of this weapons" or "2 whacks with this weapon" to kill. In Fallout (and most turn-based games) you can one shot them or at the very least, the amount of damage done with the same weapon can vary quite dramatically.

And EvoG! You're not talking like a ponce anymore!! And that thing about artists not designing content is contrary to the way Troika made Arcanum. I can't find it at the moment, but in one interview, an artist was talking about how he was making the dialogue for a character and designing a town I think. He made some comment like "I was hired as an artist but art was maybe 1/3 of what I spent my time on".

Saint_Proverbius · Post by **Saint_Proverbius** » Sun Feb 23, 2003 1:13 am

Doyle wrote:There's a big difference between innovation and changes for the Hell of it. RT has been done in RPGs -- and RPGs by BIS no less -- so I have trouble classifying it as innovation.

Doyle is correct here. But, for the sake of people who aren't paying attention...

Titles BIS has released that are turn based: 1
Titles BIS has released that are real time: 8
Titles BIS are about to release that are turn based: 0
Titles BIS are about to release that are real time: 1

I fail to see how it's even remotely possible that you can claim BIS is doing any innovation at all, when all they're doing is the real time dance.

EvoG wrote:The camera being 3D didn't make it poor for you, it was the fact that the designers chose not to allow you to pitch upward very far. This is in context of what I've been arguing in my '3D cameras suck' rebute. Its not the fact that the cameras thus the game, is 3D, but that designers do stupid things with their cameras that make them frustrating, but not because they are 3D.

There's several things about this. For one, every second I spend adjusting that camera is one less second I'm spending playing the game. In other words, this is a feature that actually gets in the way of people playing it. It's pointless interface micromanagement, so I fail to see how allowing a camera is a "good thing" in terms of a "gameplay feature".

Secondly, often games that have camera pretty much force their usage. Not too many 3D games actually allow you to see behind an object that's obscuring your view, because you have a camera. That means that rather than that camera just being an option, it's forced down your throat because you have to use it to see what's going on most of the time. They almost never have that lovely ALT key feature for spotting items, nor do they have transparent walls that get between the player and the what that player needs to see, like his or her character.

Thirdly, it ties up input options which could be used for other thing. Useful, gameplay things, because those keys or that part of the mouse will be dedicated to serving that purpose. Depending on how many axes of freedom the camera has, you're going to end up tying up a lot of buttons or a good chunk of the mouse. Instead of a zoom, that mouse wheel could be used for a quick inventory selection, for example.

You want some solid objections to cameras? There they are.

Again, Mr. Carrot, a game being 3D doesn't automatically make it a 3rd person shooter. Despite having bland RT combat, NWN is a 3D RPG... that can't be denied. It is 3D and 'is' an RPG. My guess is that you were playing a 3rd person shooter and not a 3D RPG.

And in case you missed it, NWN is fairly passive in terms of it's combat too. You click on a bad guy and watch your fighter run up to it and then watch it smack that bad guy until it's dead. Every now and then, you might want to hit F4 to make your fighter try a Feat move, or F5 to drink a potion.

It may not be a shooter, but frankly, it's not that interactive either.

SuperH wrote:The argument between 2d and 3d graphics is exatly the same as the argument between silent movies and talkies. Back when sound first became available for movies, the movies with it sucked, for a number of reasons. You now needed a silent set, the camera was heavier, now you needed tons of wiring, etc etc. This caused the first generation of talking movies to be much worse than the last generation of silent films, because silent films had been used enough and perfected.

Your analogy simply doesn't work because you're talking about vastly different things. An audio track is in no way, shape, or form, similar to polygons with a Z-Buffer.

In 2D, you see and hear an explosion, the same as in 3D. An explosion in a silent film, you're just seeing it.

If you wanted to make a good analogy, you should have done plays/theatre versus movies. Of course, your analogy would backfire horribly since modern movies suffer from the same problem 3D games have now. They're most flash and very little substance. Gladiator winning an Academy Award is enough of an example of that.

Nice attempt at logic though. Try harder next time.

PS: All you people who thought this was a good analogy need to try reading for comprehension, because it's definitely NOT a good analogy.

EvoG wrote:Programmers make the engine...graphics, game rules, interface....everything you actually 'play' with.

Right.. And they also do this with a finite team under a finite amount of time. From that, one can easily deduce that every man-week spent working on the graphics engine is one less man-week spent working on the game rules and interface.

It's also rather funny you should mention the camera thing since that's another part of the graphics engine that takes up interface development time. HUZZAH!

paynetothemax wrote:And I don't understand why the game was such crap, oh wait yeah i do. They wanted to make it for the lowest common denominator. Yay them.

I'd say it also has to do with the ideology that, We're BioWare, anything we make will sell at this point.

EvoG wrote:All this criticism...negativity...its all bullshit and fruitless. Who the fuck cares who's more right. All this time since I started on this forum, I've asked questions that I hoped would elicit constructive responses but instead....for the most part...short of a few really well thought out replies...its been "RT fucking suXors...I'm L337" or "3D engines fucking suXors...I'm so fucking 733T" then...thread turns into an OT bashfest. So much for seemingly intelligent people discussing game developement rather than who's more right and why everyone else is a stupid fuck because they don't have the same tastes or opine the same way.

Now you're just whining. There's extremely long and well thought out posts on this forum that state clearly why real time sucks. The fact of the matter is, a lot of us which have written those extremely long posts are sick of rewritten them every single fucking time some n00b shows up on the forum with their, d00d! rael time iz sooooooo raelistick! load of happy horsecrap.

The only reason people say that is because the word "real" is right there in front of them. Well, I hate to break it to those people, but there's no dairy involved in peanut butter either.

If all you people want is Fallout over and over and over again, same gameplay, same graphics, same size on your harddrive, different story, then I don't know what to tell you. If you're interested in evolving the CRPG genre and make it more fun...great, awesome...if you want to talk about how wrong everyone is and they're pussies and stupid and dumb, if it isn't the EXACT way you want it or JUST LIKE FALLOUT, then thats sad, and any of these discussions will go nowhere.

Yup, you're right, it's sad to want Fallout 3 to be less like IceWind Dale 2 with sand and guns than Fallout. :roll:

OnTheBounce wrote:Basically the problem w/many games is that their focus is graphics and glitz, rather than interesting settings, plot, etc.

Absolutely. Most games are sold by screenshots because you can look at what you're getting right away. That features list is handy, but often nothing more than made up hype that some marketting guy thinks will sell a few more copies.

So, in the end, you'll get a lot of flashy graphics and wonder where the hell those features in the feature lists are or wonder why they're shallow compared to how they're trumped up.

SuperH wrote:But instead of frentic clicking, why not just pause the game, set an attack style, suck as aim for the eyes or groin or burst shot, and then select the enemy or enemy's you want to go after and let the character go.

Given statements like the above and your silly real time is realistic idiotic rationale, I've concluded you accidently stumbled on to the wrong forum.

The forum you want are The Interplay Forums. They're loaded with chuckleheads, just like you.

axelgreese · Post by **axelgreese** » Sun Feb 23, 2003 1:26 am

Man if only i was as good as S_P, boy would I be able to impress doyle then!

Word up Saint!

Doyle · Post by **Doyle** » Sun Feb 23, 2003 1:28 am

Saint_Proverbius wrote:Your analogy simply doesn't work because you're talking about vastly different things. An audio track is in no way, shape, or form, similar to polygons with a Z-Buffer.

That's kind of the point of an analogy, Saint.

Dictionary.com on analogy wrote:1. Similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar.

He was simply comparing the lack of content in talkies vs the content in silent movies. People became so thrilled with the talkies, that they produced movies with sound just for the Hell of it. To me, that sounds an awful like like the 2d vs 3d debate.

4too · Post by **4too** » Sun Feb 23, 2003 3:28 am

LARA SPEAKS!!!!

I am referencing to the ads hurled out by the movie marketeers to get audio transitional era crowds to the "talkies". I am refering to "Garbo speaks!" as a "hook" to fill the theatres more than 70 years ago. Why? Get thee hence to the Eidos latest web weaving for their soon to be pub'ed Lara Croft vehicle.

LARA SPEAKS!!!!

Yes! Children of the Apocolypse, Lara promises speech trees akimbo, AND you can pick her power ups boys! Sculpt her upper bod with somethin' that lifts and seperates, and lets her hang around on any ledge you desire. OR,
pump up that lower muscle mass so hot you kin fry your steak, any way you please darlin'...........

I believe it's an attempt to get the Eidos milk cow to sit up AND ROLEPLAY........

LARA SPEAKS!!!!

Maybe it's an unhealthy influence of the Japanese console roleplayers.
Some have appropriate graphics for their platform, but can pc gaming say the same? Why talk of dumbing down the story or the graphics, how about dumbing down the coding so the QA people can insure a COMPLETE product. A game that isn't a con. A game that can be technically finished' without a $300 upgrade. ATI and N'Vidia silent partners in these lush pastures of 3D goodness?

But isn't Lara speaks RETRO, is this a counter to the push to graphics UBER ALLES.

Form over function.

Pushing the flash so only 5% of the planets' hardware has a hope to keep up the frame rate, another version of "Joystick Waggle" (remember that classic?) BEFORE THE GAME KILLING BUGS stops most of us cold. THE GAME KILLING BUGS that evade the 2 alloted attempts at patching, so IT"S A GAME FEATURE.

LARA SPEAKS!!!!

Stick all this talk of positive critques
between Lara's big titts,.... Stack all the marketeering and screen (come) shots and demo's at the front end. Tart the hussy up. Market share and shelf space inflates the corporate stock. Spin out two thirds of the game and say the dog or the CD burner ate the rest. Launch the rocket, and the developers' job is done, Tom Lehr said where the rocket lands is someone elses "department". Take the money and run. It's not my fault, I was only following orders.......... Does denial imply a lie, a con, or a wish for penitance?

But wait I hear the siren calling,..., tie me to the mast and stuff your ears with wax, if I live, I'll tell all shipmates! LARA SPEAKS!!!!

But maybe Eidos is willing to risk, a bit for game play, for ROLE PLAYING, for game playing. {Pop music analogy} Maybe people want more than to space out on 70's drug rock. Tired of Stairway to Heavan and Dark Side of the Moon.... Maybe gamers might git up 'n' dance when the punk's and new wave'ers regenerate the music with sophisticated simplicity. Maybe gamers want to spend their PASSION on a partner, a dream of promises, a day in a life.

More than mere 3D. SPACE AND TIME AND ENERGY. A drama, a story....

Anyone else notice this dangerous trend? Promising choice and roleplaying and not frame rates?

Tell me a story.

LARA SPEAKS!!!!

4too