deganawida

I must respectfully disagree. I found it completely ridiculous. "Help me save my wife!" "Sure, but you must convert to the Dark Side!" "Okay, I'll go kill some kids now." In contrast, ESB was filled with excellent character development, cliffhangers, plot twists, and more mature treatment of good and evil (in an imperfect world, should one let one's friends die in order to ensure victory for Good later, or save them now, and risk Evil triumphing?).

Oblivion and BeJeweled 2

It's a hypothetical, Gromnir, used originally in an attempt to both clarify various stances on the debate, and in an attempt to get you to answer whether or not replayability is an accurate measure or substitute for arbitrary, linear length. Quit being obtuse.

Then we aren't talking about the same thing. I'm not speaking of a hypothetical NWN2 single-player campaign that consists of 20 hours and withholds content, such as quests, NPCs, or items, until you've beaten it multiple times. What I was hypothesizing was a campaign where *every* choice led to a different branch, to the point that it is *impossible* to get all the content in one game, as the game is different (perhaps not radically, but enough to make each play-through feel different) each time you play it.

Yes. Dungeon Siege II tried that manipulation tactic. In DSII, players had access to more party members on the second and third play-through. Royally ticked me off. I paid my money... I don't want to be forced to trudge through the same game 2-3 times to get all the content I've paid for. If I choose to play a game more than once it's because I enjoyed the game enough to do so, not because the developer withheld content from me in an attempt to force me to do so. That tactic always annoys hell out of me, and makes me cross the developers who pull it off my future 'buy' list. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> *sigh* Di, don't take this the wrong way (you should know that I'm not being spiteful), but I'd like to ask you a question: How many time have you played through Planescape: Torment, choosing slightly different options each time through (as it is extremely difficult to do the exact same thing each time)?

Gameplay can be increased without adding hours in a linear fashion. Suppose that NWN2 only has 20 hours of gameplay on the first play-through, but each subsequent play-through, due to different consequences, choices, and dialogue options, offers an additional 20 hours of gameplay. Would that, then, be bad? The single-player campaign would still only offer the 20 hours that are attributed to Feargus, but would include multiple, different 20 hours in replays.

Yes, actually, it is. The length of Oblivion is merely a function of the need to meet its stated goals of an open-ended CRPG with a weak (weak because one can completely ignore it) story. Length is just a by-product of the elements which I listed before. What you are arguing is that Moby **** is superior to Billy Budd based simply upon the fact that the former is a full-fledged novel while the latter is merely a novella, and that the quality of the story and how each story achieves its goals are moot.

Incorrect. This is not a function of length, but of design, and meeting the purported purpose of the game: an open world, with a story that one need not adhere to or even complete. Oblivion's length is merely a side-effect of having to provide enough content for the world to feel open, and falls under both the "gameplay" and "replayability" categories which I mentioned earlier. True, it may be a fine line to some, but it is line nonetheless. Possibly, though it would need to be of much higher quality than it apparently was, as I have no memory whatsoever of it. As I mentioned in the prior thread, one of the best games that I have ever played (Metal Gear Solid) only takes me two to three hours to complete, and I play it religiously. Is it a CRPG? No, but it includes more plot, story- and character-development, and more replayability than the majority of 60+ hour-long CRPGs that I have played. I expect more from you, Gromnir, than toilet humor. Clarification from an official source would be nice. Now, for clarification from me as to length: All things being equal, would I prefer a long, high-quality game or a short, high-quality game? The answer, of course, is that I would prefer a long, high-quality game. However, that's not what this debate has been about. Instead, it is being argued that length should be the primary determining factor in whether a CRPG is a "good" game or not, and those who hold this position routinely dismiss any rebuttal which points out that length is just one facet of a game's design.

Got that in my playlist; Dirt was a great album.

Yes, that's precisely what I'm saying. Quality should outweigh quantity in every aspect of game design. More isn't always better; is more crap better than less crap?

No, it most likely wouldn't have. If Bioware couldn't tell their story well enough in those 13-14 hours to make players feel as though the story had progressed well and was resolved properly and that the gameplay was good, then 40 hours would not have done it. All 40 hours would have done would be to allow them to spread "one-dimensional characters" and "Standard 1A-story" thinner across a larger game, distracting players from the weaknesses inherent in the game design.

How short is too short? If the game ends with the plot unresolved (except for loose ends needed for stories), then the game is too short. Honestly, this game-length argument is subjective. Game length is not the standard that should be used to determine a game's quality; gameplay, story (even Donkey Kong had a story, to refer to Gromnir's example in the first page), and replayability are the standards which should be used.

Weird Al, all of Alapalooza. Then, probably They Might Be Giants' Flood. It helps to pass the day at work, is fun to listen to, and puts me in a good mood.

NPCs and PCs should both operate by the same set of rules. This extends, however, to fudging the rules; if you fudge the rules for the PCs, fudge them for the NPCs as well, and vice versa. The job of a DM is two-fold. First, the DM serves as a referee, interpreting rules and making certain that no cheating is occurring, so that all players may enjoy the game. Second, it is the DM's responsibility to create a compelling world and story for the players to have their PCs do great things. If that requires fudging the rules so that a PC doesn't die due to a bad roll, or so that an NPC isn't one-shotted, so be it, if it means a better play experience for all involved. The role of DM is tough, and requires a great deal of judgment. That's something that can't be taught through books or reading articles, but must be built through experience.

This is very true. One of the best games that I have ever played, and have been playing at least once a year for the last 8 years, takes me two to four hours to beat. This game has been universally hailed as one of the great console games, and contributed significantly to the rise of an entire gaming genre. The game? Metal Gear Solid. Though not the first Metal Gear game (which was quite good in its own right), it has still spawned 3 sequels, and created (with Thief: The Dark Project) the modern-day stealth-action game genre. While not a role-playing game, the basic design concepts of MGS are virtually identical to those found in the common CRPG. Further, MGS tells at least as detailed and deep a story as is found in the greats of CRPGs. As I near the big three-oh, I have to concur with this sentiment. With two kids, a full-time job, and my other hobbies and activities, I have neither the time nor the desire (desire when compared to activities such as teaching my two year old how to ride her bicycle) to spend 60+ hours to beat a game with limited replayability. My expectations have, in fact, changed with age and responsibility; I now expect at least the same amount of quality compressed into a shorter, more manageable game. This has been exacerbated by my excursion into MMOs, where quantity vastly outweighs quality in design parameters.

That's no longer a viable option. The United States is too dependent upon foreign fuel, production, goods, and capital to make an isolationist standpoint anything less than a total economic disaster. This is due primarily to policies set forth in the early 20th century, and cannot be undone without a paradigm shift in the States. Remember John Donne? Well, the US is no longer an island, and if we kill our aid and abandon our interests in other countries, we will die as well. How then can we take care of our own people? As to China's government, we're witnessing the collapse of Maoism and the return of Mandarin China. Though it galls me to admit it, it seems to be the system that works best over there (possibly due to the immensity of China's territory and population). The odds are good that, if reform can be done peaceful, democratic elements will be integrated into the political structure, but the odds are good that we will never see a constitutional republic in China.

I'm pulling for the fruit (sorry, k3, couldn't resist). Beat that monkey! Er, um, beat that damn dirty ape down!

There's a scene in the first Tarzan movie (before Johnny Weismuller, this was a silent film) where Tarzan kills a lion bare-handed. What most people don't know, though, is that the actor really killed the lion. The lion lost it, and the trainers couldn't get it to back down, and it tried to kill the actor. The actor (whose name I forget, but he was a wrestler before he became Tarzan) got him in a bearhug and broke his back while he was being clawed and bitten. Yes, it was an older lion, but it still weighed more than twice the actor and had its teeth and claws. It remains, to this day, one of the most impressive feats of film in history IMO.

Many, many thanks to the people of Obsidian for deciding to keep the forums open.

Well, I traded in my PS2 Saturday for it and a 2 month game card, and I have to say that I find it to be a good trade. Granted, I only played about 4 games on the PS2 that I enjoyed over a 3 1/2 year timespan, but I am enjoying the heck out of WoW. It is beautiful, even on my GeForce 2, and lots of fun. My wife, who despises computer games, has spent the last three nights watching me play and helping me out, and yesterday put the baby to bed early so she could watch me play. As for the monthly fee, it's about $0.50 a day, which is about the price of the local newspaper, so even poor little me can afford to play.

I like flinging adolescents at people who are insulting. :ph34r:

I loved the game. Was going to try out Shadowhearts 2, but I traded in my PS2 over the weekend for WoW (so far, it has been a great decision). Oh, and the story just gets darker and darker as you go along.

Thanks, Sargie, I appreciate it.

Do they have foul language? politics? imbedded images? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Um, yeah, and an X-Rated forum for people over 18 who are into that kind of stuff. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Is this X-Rated pictures or X-Rated Roleplaying [cybersex] crap? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Perhaps I should clarify, as taks and Amentep have. Yes, you may use profanity on the boards, although no one uses it like the people at the Codex. It is most often used as one would use it in casual conversation (in other words, not every other word), or to provide emphasis to a thought, and is more "PG-13" than "R". The X-Rated forum is used primarily as a forum for discussing mature topics of a romantic nature, than sibering or hard-core stuff. Personally, my favorite X-Rated threads have revolved around pictures of beautiful women. Fully half of the women in these threads were, in fact, clothed, and the other half were tasteful nudes (personally, I despise porn, although I do like tasteful nudes). It was more a celebration of the beauty of women than porn. Politics tends to be touchier, and I'll leave that bit alone (better for my blood pressure). All-in-all, it is a much friendlier and much more mature board than the Codex. Also, though it was founded as a refuge for the BIS posters displaced after the cancelling of Jefferson and the YOP at the Interplay boards, most topics deal with things other than gaming (though there is plenty of that, as well). I enjoy the boards, and would recommend that you at least look at them before making up your mind.