Game News AoD Gameplay Video - Carrinas Assassination

[BlaineMono]

Drinking dirty toilet water to heal myself and people seeing me through walls stealing their shit isn't exactly my vision of a good design either.

But crossbow kiting is perfectly ok because of all the, you know, roleplay.

Not to mention the turn-basedness!

 

[denizsi]

As for your "challenge"... uh... Jagged Alliance 2 is combat oriented and it does combat better than any RPG.

Perhaps for a more pure, obvious example - Fallout: Tactics is not really an RPG either, and it has combat that is much deeper than Fallout combat. of course, it doesn't have to worry about handling much in the way of real quests, dialogue or C&C.

JA2 is easily an RPG as far as fundamental mechanics are concerned. And JA2 > F:T but anyway, the question isn't "better than Fallout", it's better than "any RPG could possible be", which is the bullshit dead end.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

As for your "challenge"... uh... Jagged Alliance 2 is combat oriented and it does combat better than any RPG.

Perhaps for a more pure, obvious example - Fallout: Tactics is not really an RPG either, and it has combat that is much deeper than Fallout combat. of course, it doesn't have to worry about handling much in the way of real quests, dialogue or C&C.

JA2 is easily an RPG as far as fundamental mechanics are concerned. And JA2 > F:T but anyway, the question isn't "better than Fallout", it's better than "any RPG could possible be", which is the bullshit dead end.

JA2 is definitely much more a RPG than Fallout: Craptics and it certainly has way much better mechanics which is against the idea that RPG and good combat system can't be in one game. Mostly because it attempted to be semi realistic. In some aspects it's very similar to GURPS which also means that it's very similar to the original pre-SPECIAL Fallout.
Let's remember that one of the reasons why Fallout's combat system is like it is isn't some kind of a rule that RPGs can't have good combat systems but the fact that Fallout got gutted 10 months before the release, 2 years into development and they had to put a system together very fast - in a few weeks. It was an emergency situation, not a norm.

JA2 has a ton of cNPCs with in-party conflicts, cNPC-NPC interaction, every fucking cNPC is voiced, it is non-linear, has many side quests and a lot of important strategic decisions. In comparision to that Fallout Craptics is a ridculous dwarf of a game.
The only thing that Fallout Craptics does better is graphics and equipment progression.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Great, perhaps DU can 'put you to sleep' then? until something better than AoD is released anyway.

something better than AoD is getting released constantly. Not ye olde schoole arr pee gay style games, but much better. And in 3d!

seriously, I'd rather play halo than some nostalgia-fuelled abortion of a game that doesn't even exist. And I will never play halo.

Cool. This doesn't explain why you are posting in this thread then. Must be personal. I certainly don't go posting in the Bethesda game threads on here.

Now why would you think it's personal? Blaine likes browsing new forums, often registering just to make a single insightful post and move on. He's too busy drawing, uh, animals to stay and chat.

^ Before Duel. So much tension.

 

[SimpleComplexity]

Critical hit by VD

 

[Berekän]

A deviant furry mad at the Codex tried to troll it and got trolled instead, nice work VD

 

[shihonage]

I'm just saying that the supposed "depth" of combat in Fallout Craptics has nothing to do with it being less RPG.

Assuming for a moment that "new animations" is all there is ... so then, you don't consider the time spent on internal management of different animation states and their effects on gameplay, to consume actual development time? You think just making new sprites and plonking them into Fallout would make people go prone, alter their to-hit%, detection and whatnot, by themselves? And the game would balance itself for it automatically, as well?

Right. Besides, there's more to it than just new animations.FO:T also allowed itself the luxury of modeling multi-level structures, more detailed per-teammate combat control, and other things I may be skipping over because its been a long time.

You're not a full time development team. They had four programmers and one lead designer and four game designers to do that job and were improving a pre-existing combat system.

The FO:T devs weren't merely improving a pre-existing combat system. That's not as easy as you make it sound. They weren't using Fallout source, they were recreating everything from scratch, which, in different engine, requires a ton of tuning time as well. Turn-based and RT combat isn't really a novelty, but they had to make all the math fit so it doesn't play like nonsense.

And what does this has to do with me, suddenly? Nothing. This is about a very simple math of complex games being unable to fully flesh out a single subsystem in the same way that a game with more focus on that subsystem can.

JA2 is easily an RPG as far as fundamental mechanics are concerned.

Yeah, and then FO:T is also an RPG as far as fundamental mechanics are concerned. There's like, leveling, man! And shit!

Except, neither one is as complete as an RPG of FO caliber. Which was entirely my point.

 

[BlaineMono]

Now why would you think it's personal? Blaine likes browsing new forums, often registering just to make a single insightful post and move on.

Aw Vince don't hold a grudge against me, that was a long time ago. Also it was a damn funny joke.

He's too busy drawing, uh, animals to stay and chat.

Also quit browsing deviantart for furfag porn and go polish your game, mr. indie gamedev star turned internet detective.

Also also that wasn't even my drawing =)

 

[denizsi]

JA2 is easily an RPG as far as fundamental mechanics are concerned.

Yeah, and then FO:T is also an RPG as far as fundamental mechanics are concerned. There's like, leveling, man! And shit!

Except, neither one is as complete as an RPG of FO caliber. Which was entirely my point.

Complete as an RPG of FO caliber? Is FO the ultimate RPG whose standards all RPGs must abide by, which would invalidate 95% of "RPGs" out there, starting from the earliest games released in early 80s, because you just did that ie. invalidated every that isn't even remotely similar to Fallout? No, that's a shit argument, I'm afraid and Awor Szurkrarz 1157 already explained why. Pull your shit together, man!

The only significant difference between JA2 and FO is one puts the priority on meta-gaming and thus the complete game interface is built to satisfy those needs with little regard to secondary goals like dialogue and quests, and the other puts the priority on narrative and thus the interface is built to provide the practical needs by giving a proper dialogue and a quests panel to keep track of your progress. Otherwise, pure RP-mechanics wise, JA2 is superior in every way and more, it is already considered to be RPG by people far more knowledgeable. Sorry to crush your dreams.

Ultimately, my statement was and is that there's no validity to "an 'x game' can do x better than an RPG can so it's not realistic to expect good 'x' from an RPG" and it's not even a argument; it's backed up by examples. It's a matter of building the game from ground up with very clear goals and ways to achieve those goals. Not saying it's easy but exactly what the fuck is easy to begin with? If you want easy, go fucking make Tetris!

 

[Tigranes]

It blows my mind how the only post where some dumbfuck thinks the 'photoshopped trailer' was real is on the Codex. And then it's topped off with bitchfighting over animal porn. It's almost like the Codex is recreating the Funniest Thread....

 

[BlaineMono]

The only significant difference between JA2 and FO is one puts the priority on meta-gaming

I am sorry, game's core gameplay mechanic is "meta-gaming?"

princessbride.jpg

Ultimately, my argument was and is that there's no validity to "an 'x game' can do x better than an RPG can so it's not realistic to expect good 'x' from an RPG" and it's not even a suggestion; it's confirmed by examples. It's a matter of building the game from ground up with very clear goals and ways to achieve those goals.

So basically your argument is that if a developer has a very clear goal of making a good CRPG game which is also a good X game, a good Y game and a good Z game (and naturally has skills and funding for making 4 different games at once) then in time they will probably make a CRPG that is good at X, Y and Z and also not suck as a CRPG?

Well, yes, I suppose.

 

[shihonage]

Complete as an RPG of FO caliber? Is FO the ultimate RPG whose standards all RPGs must abide by, which would invalidate 95% of "RPGs" out there, starting from the earliest games released in early 80s, because you just did that ie. invalidated every that isn't even remotely similar to Fallout? No, that's a shit argument, I'm afraid and Awor Szurkrarz 1157 already explained why. Pull your shit together, man!

We're not talking about "any" RPG, anything you can shove under the RPG umbrella.

This thread is specifically about AOD, a game that aims to imitate Fallout in many ways - and this entire argument started with someone bitching about how AOD, i.e. the Fallout clone, doesn't have noise-detection and shadow systems of a dedicated stealth game.

Therefore, we ARE talking about Fallout here, yes.

Here I could also say "pull your shit together", but it's kinda juvenile, don't you think?

The only significant difference between JA2 and FO is one puts the priority on meta-gaming and thus the complete game interface is built to satisfy those needs with little regard to secondary goals like dialogue and quests, and the other puts the priority on narrative and thus the interface is built to provide the practical needs by giving a proper dialogue and a quests panel to keep track of your progress. Otherwise, pure RP-mechanics wise, JA2 is superior in every way and more

What exactly are "pure RP mechanics"? Last time I checked, dialogue and quest tracking were as "RP mechanics" as it gets. Coincidentally, they require if not the most, then a lion's share of work.

it is already considered to be RPG by people far more knowledgeable. Sorry to crush your dreams.

This is now about "what is considered an RPG"? This is not what this exchange was about. See above.

Ultimately, my statement was and is that there's no validity to "an 'x game' can do x better than an RPG can so it's not realistic to expect good 'x' from an RPG" and it's not even a argument; it's backed up by examples. It's a matter of building the game from ground up with very clear goals and ways to achieve those goals. Not saying it's easy but exactly what the fuck is easy to begin with? If you want easy, go fucking make Tetris!

Okay, so where's our complete RPG with complete sneaking mechanics of Thief and above, and combat of JA2?

Come to think of it, whose dreams are really being crushed here? Is this where the hatred is coming from? I can empathize with that. We all want better games. I just don't agree with the idea that VD's lack of a dedicated stealth system means he's slacking off.

 

[denizsi]

The only significant difference between JA2 and FO is one puts the priority on meta-gaming

I am sorry, game's core gameplay mechanic is "meta-gaming?"

princessbride.jpg

It's not? Oh sorry, I took you for someone who has played JA2. My mistake. Entire game is a meta-simulation with a pretty face-lift. Managing finance, troops, equipment, mercs' stats and their training, etc. etc. If you have played it and disagree about the meta-gaming remark, it only proves how good the game's design is at obscuring that layer. Otherwise, you can't do shit without caring about meta-aspects, not even with the retarded enemy AI.

So basically your argument is that if a developer has a very clear goal of making a good CRPG game which is also a good X game, a good Y game and a good Z game (and naturally has skills and funding for making 4 different games at once) then in time they will probably make a CRPG that is good at X, Y and Z and also not suck as a CRPG?

Well, yes, I suppose.

Alright, now it's obvious you have no idea what you are talking about. 4 different games at once? Heh. Sad.

Therefore, we ARE talking about Fallout here, yes.

And what does that have anything to do with what I have to say? VD isn't an experienced game developer. He got into developing AoD as a pure amateur. No prior experience whatsoever and obviously he didn't have a clear and focused vision regarding individual elements in the game other than a general philosophy, which is all perfectly normal. He even said himself about lacking focus in stealth. Therefore, even bringing up that invalid argument in the first place is a fallacy; whether you agree or disagree with my position, that argument itself has absolutely no bearing on VD. So, my attack on that invalid argument itself is completely detached from the discussion over AoD.

Here I could also say "pull your shit together", but it's kinda juvenile, don't you think?

What's wrong, shihonage? Why so defensive that you can't handle some sarcasm?

What exactly are "pure RP mechanics"? Last time I checked, dialogue and quest tracking were as "RP mechanics" as it gets. Coincidentally, they require if not the most, then a lion's share of work.

Duh. Pure RP mechanics = characters' stats determining the outcome of actions. More actions tied to and determined by stats, the purer it gets as it means less inconsequential actions available. For instance, In JA2's case, when you take a step in JA2, there is stuff going on in the background that decides if there will be any one of several outcomes to it, a good deal more than average pre-next-genitis RPGs. You crouch, crawl, run, sneak, draw a gun, aim a gun, turn around, swim, open a door, close a door and any number of several things you wouldn't even think about in your typical RPG can happen, all tied into the characters' stats to make some sense out of it. Stuff some of which has no bearing whatsoever on how the gameworld works in other RPGs.

This is now about "what is considered an RPG"? This is not what this exchange was about. See above.

Not really, but I was under the impression that you drove the point towards that base.

Okay, so where's our complete RPG with complete sneaking mechanics of Thief and above, and combat of JA2?

Puh-lease, what sneaking mechanics in Thief are you speaking of? Stealth-wise, Thief is very primitive. Especially when compared to JA2. Thief is a very simple but a very good game, but sneaking works just as good, if not far better, in JA2 because the game takes into account several more things when you are sneaking which affect your detection of others, others' detection of you and the AI's reaction to various events is far more advanced. Now I admit that calling it "better" might not be fair game since one is first-person real-time and the other is isometric and semi-TB, but sneaking is a whole lot more complicated and nuanced matter in JA2.

Seriously, Thief is vastly overrated regarding the depth of stealth.

I just don't agree with the idea that VD's lack of a dedicated stealth system means he's slacking off.

But I don't either! I even argue that his stance is perfectly understandable. I was only responding to that ridiculous generalist invalid-argument I mentioned earlier, which has no place especially in a discussion about AoD.

VD, I still would like to hear about the stealth model you have in mind for a future game.

 

[shihonage]

Therefore, we ARE talking about Fallout here, yes.

And what does that have anything to do with what I have to say? VD isn't an experienced game developer. He got into developing AoD as a pure amateur. No prior experience whatsoever and obviously he didn't have a clear and focused vision regarding individual elements in the game other than a general philosophy, which is all perfectly normal. He even said himself about lacking focus in stealth. Therefore, even bringing up that invalid argument in the first place is a fallacy; whether you agree or disagree with my position, that argument itself has absolutely no bearing on VD. So, my attack on that invalid argument itself is completely detached from the discussion over AoD.

Except, actual Fallout and Arcanum, built by "professional teams" suffered from the same issues you're bemoaning.

Here I could also say "pull your shit together", but it's kinda juvenile, don't you think?

What's wrong, shihonage? Why so defensive that you can't handle some sarcasm?

Oh, if only there was something to defend against. All you got is anger.

What exactly are "pure RP mechanics"? Last time I checked, dialogue and quest tracking were as "RP mechanics" as it gets. Coincidentally, they require if not the most, then a lion's share of work.

Duh. Pure RP mechanics = characters' stats determining the outcome of actions.

So "pure RP mechanics" are what you say they are. And conveniently, they snuggly fit into what JA2 is. What a miraculous coincidence.

Of course this entire branch was artificially generated by you in an attempt to distract from the actual subject. Let's get back to that now.

You see, JA2 is less complete of an RPG than Fallout is. It is an axiom. If you challenge this axiom, then you're being purposely obtuse, and arguing with someone resorting to playing dumb is a complete waste.

This is now about "what is considered an RPG"? This is not what this exchange was about. See above.

Not really, but I was under the impression that you drove the point towards that base.

Your impressions have a distinct strawman smell to them. From the beginning this was specifically about AOD or a game of AOD caliber, and why it is not likely to have deep stealth mechanics. Not about what RPG means or what is the meaning of our existence on this planet.

Okay, so where's our complete RPG with complete sneaking mechanics of Thief and above, and combat of JA2?

Puh-lease, what sneaking mechanics in Thief are you speaking of? Stealth-wise, Thief is very primitive. Especially when compared to JA2. Thief is a very simple but a very good game, but sneaking works just as good, if not far better, in JA2 because the game takes into account several more things when you are sneaking which affect your detection of others, others' detection of you and the AI's reaction to various events is far more advanced. Now I admit that calling it "better" might not be fair game since one is first-person real-time and the other is isometric and semi-TB, but sneaking is a whole lot more complicated and nuanced matter in JA2.

Seriously, Thief is vastly overrated regarding the depth of stealth.

Evaded the question. Unless of course you continue insisting that JA2 is as complete of an RPG as a Fallout caliber game, in which case, once again, you're playing dumb.

I just don't agree with the idea that VD's lack of a dedicated stealth system means he's slacking off.

But I don't either! I even argue that his stance is perfectly understandable. I was only responding to that ridiculous generalist invalid-argument I mentioned earlier, which has no place especially in a discussion about AoD.

Yes, the "ridiculous" argument where focusing on dialogue and quests takes away from the stealth, and where focusing on stealth will take away from something else.

Despite the evidence fully supporting it. JA2 is combat strong, not dialogue-strong. Fallout1+2 are dialogue-strong, not combat-strong.

And you still haven't shown me an example of this ideal game that, your claims imply, should have long existed by now. Alas, there's no evidence to support your claims, but there's plenty of evidence to support mine.

 

[BlaineMono]

It's not? Oh sorry, I took you for someone who has played JA2. My mistake. Entire game is a meta-simulation with a pretty face-lift. Managing finance, troops, equipment, mercs' stats and their training, etc. etc.

I get your point (probably), but why stop there? Let's get this shit on the road!

JA2 is an online flower shop simulator with some mercenary-related metagame.

See how really meta it is? Oh man I've just came in my pants, that's how meta!

Also I really really hate to do this, but here's what that word really means.

Alright, now it's obvious you have no idea what you are talking about. 4 different games at once? Heh. Sad.

Let's count together, shall we.

First of all, we're making a CRPG, therefore we're doing all the stuff that makes a good CRPG - setting, locations, story, charsheet etc.

Second, we need to make an adventure game. So we're doing lots of interesting larger-than-life characters, lots of dialogue with lots of dialogue options, everything competently written.

Third, we're making a turn-based tactical combat game. Because, as we all know, turn-based is hot shit. So we're forced to do an extended combat system that 1) allows for interesting and diverse tactical choices, 2) is not slow and boring, and 3) doesn't let you do silly unrealistic things like running away from some swordsmen while winding your crossbow.

Fourth, we're making a stealth game. We have to - diplomats got their gameplay, fighters got their gameplay, we need a gameplay for rogues. Not Thief clone, no silly lockpicking minigames - something like MGS will do.

Now, there are lots of games that are very good at one of those things.

There are like, I dunno, 50 that are good at 2 of 4.

I can't think of a single one that is good at 3.

Can 4 be done? Sure, just like AoD can be released in 2011 and not be shit at the same time. I mean, highly improbable.

 

[denizsi]

Except, actual Fallout and Arcanum, built by "professional teams" suffered from the same issues you're bemoaning.

And? Is there even a point here? Is there a rule that any "professional team" would have none of those shortcomings nor did I ever mention something along those lines?

In case you thought I did: no, I didn't.

What's wrong, shihonage? Why so defensive that you can't handle some sarcasm?

Oh, if only there was something to defend against. All you got is anger.[/quote]

Not angry at all. Just making some light hostile fun of you but you're too personally motivated to get any part of it, I guess.

Duh. Pure RP mechanics = characters' stats determining the outcome of actions.

So "pure RP mechanics" are what you say they are. And conveniently, they snuggly fit into what JA2 is. What a miraculous coincidence.

What *I* say? Oh wow. What is this I don't even. Welcome to ConsoleCodex. You can't even define what is RP at the most basic level now. If you can't agree on "RP = stats driven shit" at the most basic level, I'm... out of words. Wow.

Of course this entire branch was artificially generated by you in an attempt to distract from the actual subject. Let's get back to that now.

...

You have issues. You can't discuss something without turning it into a matter of ego. "Artificially generated attempt to distract from the actual subject". Right.

You see, JA2 is less complete of an RPG than Fallout is. It is an axiom. If you challenge this axiom, then you're being purposely obtuse, and arguing with someone resorting to playing dumb is a complete waste.

How is JA2 less complete of an RPG than Fallout just because it lacks in the dialogue and questing section in comparison although Fallout in turn also "lacks" in every other section of the game in comparison? It is a different type of RPG as a whole and it does what it does a hundred fold better than Fallout. And again, why are you so desperate to turn this into a personal matter; "being purposely obtuse"? Seriously, what the fuck? I'm explaining in detail how shit works and all you got is "no, you're purposely shitting me". Right.

Your impressions have a distinct strawman smell to them. From the beginning this was specifically about AOD or a game of AOD caliber. Not about what RPG means or what is the meaning of our existence on this planet.

So are yours. Since when discussions in threads are exclusively limited to the original subject to the point there's never ever any deviation? My original argument was against a generalist invalid-opinion that was raised. I even explained that but you can't accept anything at face value and prefer to keep accusing *me* of purposely evading the subject and whatnot. Right.

Evaded the question. Unless of course you continue insisting that JA2 is as complete of an RPG as a Fallout caliber game, in which case, once again, you're playing dumb.

See what I mean? I'm afraid, no, if anyone's evading anything, it's you. I told you that JA2 has everything underneath to make it enough of an RPG. There are no technical shortcomings, only different design goals. It's not a matter of caliber or being "complete" whatever the fuck that means. Is there some universal standard of "completeness"? Fallout has specific goals to its design and most of them are realized successfully. It's a very gamist with a strong narrative. It doesn't *need* to achieve more. JA2 is gamist-simulationist and doesn't give a shit about narrative. It also does what it aims at pretty good. Both are fine examples of their respective genres.

But in the end, JA2 is -and read this part carefully- has *more* "stuff" going on in the game world as a result of (ie. determined by) characters' "stats", ie. a concept I think we all agree to be at the heart of RPGs, what with the "character skill vs. player skill" mantra and all that. Now, I don't know about other people so maybe I was wrong to assume but when something has *more* stuff happening as a result of character stats than *fewer* stuff happening as a result of character stats, then I'd be inclined to think that the former (ie. the one with *more* stuff happening as a result of character stats) would be more true to being a role playing game and thus my thinking that it would have more "pure RP mechanics".

Yes, the "ridiculous" argument where focusing on dialogue and quests takes away from the stealth, and where focusing on stealth will take away from something else.

Despite the evidence fully supporting it. JA2 is combat strong, not dialogue-strong. Fallout1+2 are dialogue-strong, not combat-strong.

And why is that? Did SirTech so badly wanted to make it more like Fallout in that regard but couldn't due to whatever? I think not. What little dialogue there is in the game already facilitates character stats with different outcomes. Maybe they weren't very imaginative about it or maybe they simple didn't care to do more than they did regarding dialogue but for anyone who has played JA2, it should be obvious that they would be perfectly capable of doing more involved dialogue as can be evidenced from minimal snippets already in the game.

And you still haven't shown me an example of this ideal game that, your claims imply, should have long existed by now. Alas, there's no evidence to support your claims, but there's plenty of evidence to support mine.

I'm giving what I find to be the finest example as evidence using some extrapolation back-ed up by data. In contrast, your entire counter-argument boils down to "No, it doesn't have dialogue so it's less of an RPG and isn't complete". Right.

And gosh... you are so desperate to alienate someone you don't agree with like a true xenophobe. I'm even trying to bridge a gap of communication between the two of us but you're only responding with more narrow hostility and have no trouble hurling personally motivated accusations. I've explained enough to make my point. Until you are capable of assessing that data and responding without turning this into a clash of ideologies, there's no point in further discussion.

 

[denizsi]

I get your point (probably), but why stop there? Let's get this shit on the road!

JA2 is an online flower shop simulator with some mercenary-related metagame.

See how really meta it is? Oh man I've just came in my pants, that's how meta!

Also I really really hate to do this, but here's what that word really means.

I know what metagaming means. In no way did I imply anything like "JA2 is an online flower shop simulator with some mercenary-related metagame" to mean JA2 could be anything to anyone. When you play JA2 for at least the second time, it's impossible to fall into the metagaming trap because there's so much to the game and as you play, you can even notice that the developers actually trusted you to play it that way. If you are a perceptive player, you will start doing it even on your first play.

Let's count together, shall we.

Aren't you taking it out of context? You aren't getting anywhere with game development if you approach the matter like that, as if any given element of a game is in total isolation and can be detached from the rest of it and cumulatively joined together in the end, to the point of the it having the remotest similarity to developing individually different games.

Developing an entire game around Stealth would have to be radically different than developing a stealth component for an RPG. Former needs to stand on its own as a game, as the entire experience. That isn't a prerequisite to having more advanced or simplistic game mechanics. Thief, as a game entirely based on stealth, is all about the opportunities exclusive to the character of Garret, many of which are, in turn, based on not stealth itself but the immersion factor. Otherwise, you can speedrun the entire game pretty fast but I strongly doubt anyone here would feel that would be the equivalent of "the Thief experience" they have in mind when they think of the game Thief.

Is it not different in an RPG? Regardless of the importance or the mechanical complexity of the stealth component, you'll likely never need to focus as heavily on providing a very singular experience based on stealth. It will always be a mix of many things, no matter how good individual systems are. You will always talk to some characters through the dialogue component, another part of your RPG, to find yourself reasons to employ your skills in stealth and find people to sell your loot, yet another component of the RPG that would most likely be there with or without stealth, as opposed to doing entire levels solely dedicated for providing sneaking opportunities, making cutscenes and devising an entire game's story around the center character to make it a stealth game as a whole.

In the RPG, however, you'll make levels whether you have stealth in mind or not. The game world will be there regardless. Except, if you decided to add stealth to your game at the beginning of your development cycle, it will be an organic part of creating the game world, with each component of the game complimenting the others in some way. So it's not like you are developing "one more" game just because you decided to add quality stealth (provided it's not a last-minute or mid-development suicide-decision) but maybe more like "1.5x" the effort due to the way everything is connected in an RPG.

 

[shihonage]

Mein gott, deniszi.

I think this is my first time being lectured about tone by someone increasingly raging at me.

The only thing I can find in there is your claim that JA2 has "more behind the scenes" going on than Fallout, which is highly debatable when comparing the games as a whole, and not just their combat systems.

It appears that your entire argument rests on JA2 being a shining beacon of what you propose your ideal RPG to be, and therefore, is living counter to the "lie" about RPGs having to sacrifice one gameplay element in favor of others.

Games like Fallout, AOD and yes, my project, do not share your vision. We want intricate dialogue and quest systems in our RPG, which takes away development time from combat mechanics, which you clearly have singled out as your most important aspect of an RPG.

What's double ironic is that your claims of JA2 having "different design goals" are actually supporting my point. It is a game with a specific focus, which means it neglected dialogue and quests.

P.S.

for anyone who has played JA2, it should be obvious that they would be perfectly capable of doing more involved dialogue as can be evidenced from minimal snippets already in the game

You just have no idea about the chasm of difference between implementation of minimal dialogue and real dialogue, do you.

P.P.S. I found a piece in a post you addressed to someone else that may be key to understanding you:

In the RPG, however, you'll make levels whether you have stealth in mind or not. The game world will be there regardless. Except, if you decided to add stealth to your game at the beginning of your development cycle, it will be an organic part of creating the game world. So it's not like you are developing "one more" game just because you decided to add quality stealth but more like, maybe "1.5x" the effort due to the way everything is connected in an RPG.

1.5 is not 1.0. You admit that it takes significantly more time to implement a full-on stealth system, but you also deny that doing so can take significant dev.time from other features.

Yeah, I think we're done here.

 

[OminousBlueDot]

Yeah, I think we're done here.

But guys, you haven't answered the most important question: What is an RPG?

 

[BlaineMono]

But guys, you haven't answered the most important question: What is an RPG?

Eye of Beholder is.

I know what metagaming means.

Bro, you don't. You don't, bro.

Aren't you taking it out of context?

Bro, I don't. It's still four games worth of work and four different skillsets required, bro.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

You see, JA2 is less complete of an RPG than Fallout is. It is an axiom. If you challenge this axiom, then you're being purposely obtuse, and arguing with someone resorting to playing dumb is a complete waste.

Storyfag vermin.

 

[BlaineMono]

Storyfag vermin.

Five digit noobfuck.

 

[denizsi]

Mein gott, deniszi.

I think this is my first time being lectured about tone by someone increasingly raging at me.

Lecturing about tone, of all things? That's not true. And raging at you? Riight. I've already told you otherwise but obviously you know better than I do myself. Will you ever stop doing that?

Thanks for being upright about it, at least. I might have wasted yet more time reading your ego-tripping. You're welcome to come back whenever you get over making things personal. It's not a world of "us against them", nobody is attacking you here.

 

[denizsi]

Aren't you taking it out of context?

Bro, I don't. It's still four games worth of work and four different skillsets required, bro.

I can do one that too. Here: "Bro, no u, bro."

"It has fightan in it so it's a fightan game for one! it has walkin'n'talkin so it has adventure for two! and so on" is not an argument. It's a fallacy. If you have to turn it into a illogical game of maths by the mere amount of genre elements, let's see how it turns out:

Fighting game: Build fighting system. Build story. Build game world. Items & character models. Textures. Sound. Music (that makes 7 "game stuff")

Adventure game: Build puzzle systems. Build dialogue system. Build story. Build game world. Items & character models. Textures. Sound. Music (8 "game stuff")

Stealth game: Build stealth system. Build story. Build game world. Items & character models. Textures. Sound. Music (7 "game stuff")

Fightan game + Adventure game + Stealth game = 7 + 8 + 7 = 22 "game stuff". Wow, 22? That sure looks like a lot to me. Maybe you have a point after all. Let's see how it works out for an RPG, though, shall we?

Build story. Build fightan system. Build dialogue system. Build stealth system. Build mini-games and the like (to substitute for the puzzles in an adventure game). Build game world. Items & character models. Textures. Sound. Music. 10 "game stuff". B-b-but how can this be? When you add the others together it's 22 and when you put them together, you got 10? Wow, man, this has gotta be magic!

 

[Melcar]

And the game isn´t even out yet.