Jediphile

Well, you seem pretty optimistic. Who said *every* fan has to be pleased? If it's a good game then people will buy it: if I like it I'll buy it; others won't. Perhaps the most interesting comment you make is the reference (unconscious?) to "The Next Generation",

Lord of the Rings Third Age Lord of the Rings Tactics EA publish a lot of stuff. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Aren't those strategy games?

My personal GM motto is: "Life itself is rarely fair, so why would you expect more from me?" :D Well, maybe it's not so fun as I tought... Certainly my players didn't laugh much... "

What was the rating on KotOR2? As a matter of fact, what was it for KotOR1?

Even more defining of RPG's by you. No "I thinks" here... just cold hard facts <{POST_SNAPBACK}> "I think" this is precisely why "I think" I have begun to put "I think" in front of every "I think" statement "I think" I make in this topic - "I think" people seem incapable of grasping the "I think" relatively simple concept that "I think" when I make a statement, "I think" I can only do so on the basis of "I think" my own personal opinions. "I think" That is is considered obvious in most intelligent discussion "I think" I participate in, but "I think" apparently not here "I think" for some reason... Calling "my definition". How odd you hate me for saying the exact same thing... and once again saying what defines a RPG (no "I think") <{POST_SNAPBACK}> "I think" this is yet another personal remark "I think" and would have been taken as such by "I think" most other people "I think" on most other boards. My definition further defined.... eh, not... " Seems like randomness grabbed you here... and the further convo became Very confusing. And you once again define RPG without "I think". Just cold hard facts (well; your facts) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> "I think" this is already answered as far as I can tell, but "I think" it's reasonable for me to argue that "I think" I don't have to agree that "I think" randomness is a prerequisite for a game being an RPG.

I think Nihilus is simply drawn to the most powerful jedi in order to "feed" on them... Remember what Kreia said... Kreia: "It is a technique that is almost as old as the Sith themselves... it is a means of severing connections between life, the Force, and feeding upon the death it causes.It cannot be taught... it can only be gained through instinct, through experiencing its effects, first-hand." {Quietly}"Yes. And he fed upon its destruction - it will sustain him, for a time.Because it is not something that can ever truly be controlled... and it leaves nothing to conquer in its wake.And it rules him, not the other way around. It has its own will, its own instincts." {Chiding}"Power? Do you think so?{Shakes head}You would be wrong. There is no strength in the hunger he possesses... and the will behind his power is a primal thing. And it devours him as he devours others - his mere presence kills all around him, slowly, feeding him. He is already dead, it is simply a question of how many he kills before he falls."

Yeah... Though I would have welcomed the chance to tell the jedi council just what I think of their deception and manipulation... PS: Been meaning to ask for while now, where did you get that avatar? It looks awfully familiar somehow... :D

So does that mean dismemberment would be okay in KotOR3?

We have a winner

Well, not sure about "more powerful", but I guess that's why you put it in quotations... They do get the a lot from both worlds, though not the best of either.

"I think" it seemed relevant since "I think" my own personal opinion "I think" obviously wasn't good enough "I think" for some people...

"I think" I never actually said that. "I think" but since mine wasn't good enough, "I think" it seemed relevant to point to what someone else thought. "I think" you'll note that "I think" I said it was not mine. "I think" feel free to disagree.

"I think" now I "borderline fanatiscism" because "I think" I argue for why "I think" I think Diablo is not an RPG?!?!? "I think" this is getting weirder and weirder... :ph34r: "I think" I don't have a problem with people disagreeing with me. "I think" I do have a problem with people telling me "I think" what I can and cannot be allow to think ("I think" ) "I think" no. "I think" so now you too want to tell me what I think, "I think" just like BattleCookiee does... "I think" I already explain "I think" that I simply defended my right to "I think" have my own opinion on the matter. But "I think" that's not good enough either, "I think" it seems... "I think" so it's my fault if "I think" they keep attacking me? "I think" why don't you give them a share of the blame? I beg to differ. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> "I think" I do. "I think" I can't speak for you, though... "

Happens more often than you are willing to believe... Once again see top of my post... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Uh, okay. I'll be looking forward to those sports games by Bioware and Obsidian then... and the RPGs by EA... " Why would I doubt that. Blizzard has shown they take great care in what they make; be it Adventure, RPG, MMORPG or RTS. Personnally I don't like ANY of there games but that doesn't mean they can make games like games should be made and give extremely good support... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, leaving aside the matter of whether Diablo is an RPG or not (which I think is irrelevant in this case), I think most people will agree that Blizzard is not known for making the "deep" sort of RPGs like the FO series. That doesn't mean that they can't, it just means that I haven't seen any evidence that they can, since they don't have a tradition for it. Why would they suddenly begin now, though? Blizzard make a decent living by the games they do make, and if it ain't broke, why fix it? This also doesn't fill me with confidence that they could make a great FO3, if they ever were to make it.

Not sure if I'd call Qui-Gon gray... He may not always follow the code (which would speak for him being gray), but he is a member of the order and heeds the council (which speaks against it)... He's not a jedi blindly dedicated to the rules of the order, though... Jolee, on the other hand, is definitely gray - he doesn't follow the code and has left the order.

"I think" I didn't. "I think" it wasn't my personal or even "I think" unique interpretation. "I think" it was dictionary.com's definition, "I think" not mine. "I think" I didn't do that either. "I think" I just said that "I think" I disagreed with her. "I think" that's fine, but "I think" that still doesn't mean that "I think" I have to agree with it. "I think" it also doesn't mean that "I think" I should make arguments to the contrary. "I think" I don't hate it, "I think" I just disagree with it and "I think" say so. "I think" and why. "I think" is it very wrong of me, "I think" to explain why?

You forget that I already said I liked Matrix Reloaded better than the original... [Ducks for cover as the angry mob charges...] :D

What? Isn't anyone going to protest over this being insulting to their religious convictions?!? :D

Uh, thanks for that... I guess

That's what I meant. The last bit of my post above was a typo. :"> Given that Handmaiden is, as far as I can tell, at least 17 in KotOR, there is no question that she must have been the result of a union between Yusanis and Arren Kae *before* the Mandalorian Wars even began, which was a full 15 years before the events of K2 and still several years before Revan led his followers against the mandalorians.

The problem is who gets to definte what makes for "an objective measure". And I didn't post a definition, I just gave a link to one. You don't have to agree with. Nor do I, for that matter...

No, it's an action game masquerading as an RPG due to character development and concepts like classes and levels that many people think make it into an RPG only because they fail to realise that many RPGs don't have classes and levels at all. It has some character development in the skill system, though, and it's fun for a while... But that doesn't make it an RPG. Nor does the fact that it has a plot. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> <{POST_SNAPBACK}> "I think" Right. "I think" I shall make a point of, "I think" putting the word "I think" in front of every state, "I think" I'll ever make on these boards, "I think" from now on. "I think" happy?

Sims is not quite so original... You're forgetting the Little Computer People

So basically you won't let him turn over a new leaf on account of past disagreement... that's just sad. I am not avoiding the issue. After all your questions had nothing to do with what I tried to prove AT ALL... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No? Maybe you should note what you actually say then... See above. And I still think it is a completely random question you are asking here, with absolutely NO connection with my post... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No connection? You posted this... You may have done so to point out that a developer can make more than one type of game, except all the examples you mentioned well over a decade old when the gaming industry looked rather different than it does today. How many people were in a development team in those days? How many are in one today? If you bring up a point like that, it has to have relevancy to the current state of affairs in the industry, and that was not the case here. In short, you compared apples and oranges... Because it's no relevant to talk about new gaming concepts when the industry standard is as repetitive and unimaginative as it is today. How many genres do we even have in computer gaming today? Do we have more than five or six? Perhaps, but not a lot more than that I think. And the fact that we even *can* speak of "genres" says a lot about the industry. How often have we heard in an interview that the devs make comments along the lines of "well, it'll be a FPS, but with some RPG elements" or similar, and the reporter (and readers) immediately know what we're talking about. There might have been genres of games 20 to 25 years ago in the golden age of computer gaming, but they were a lot less strictly defined than they are today, almost to the point of being meaningless. Whereas if today you say a game is an RPG as opposed to an adventure game, everybody knows what you're getting at. A consequence of that is that the developers have frequently specialized in making one sort of game. Does this mean they can't make any others? No, but they don't often do so. They tend to stick to what they know instead. I doubt will be seeming Obsidian or Bioware make sports games, for example, just as I doubt EA will be putting out a lot of RPGs that they developed themselves. Or are you saying that you wouldn't have any doubts about it (assuming you care), if Blizzard were developing FO3?

Just pointing out what can happen to a company that has made a few games that the fans aren't too happy with... Lol, one thread you cannot save your reasoning, so let's continue in another? Might I also remind you that this is yet another ironic statement (fix that detector!) based on the fact that in every FO III thread Hades tells us how bad First Person FO is and how they are going to "Oblivionise it"... but where is the information that can point to such a conclusion? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Resorting to make it personal rather than address the point I made. Very compelling argumentation there - that sure puts me in my place and no mistake! And thus... only demonstrates that companies CAN make different types of genres instead of only 1. And so new genres where created. And I noted some of these new genres... Don't start ripping examples out of their context <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You didn't see to notice, so I'll ask about the games again (note that the following is a direct copy and paste from above): How old are they? How many games based on new concepts have you seen in, say, the last three or four years? Oh, and that means that developers can no longer create for other genres except their root one? Then why does TimeGate make RTS and FPS? Why does Bethesda make Oblvion type games and pirating games? Why does Rockstar make different games than GTA? Why does Gas Powered Games make Hack&Slash and RTS, how can Blizzard make Hack&Slash and RTS and MMORPG? Eh, explain that then? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't try to imply that I said a company could make only one type of game. I did not. You're just avoiding the issue and you know it. If you can't answer, then you would be better adviced not to reply to my posts at all. If you didn't get the point the first (or second) time: How many games based on entirely new gaming concepts have you seen in the last three or four years?